Yeah, it sounds reasonable, if just on the basis of common sense.
But there is no need to speculate on the authorship of the Hebrews. It was given the stamp of approval over and over by the early church. But as always, there have been 'scholars' and such, whose only objective has been the discredit Scripture.
Eusebius AD 265 – 340 became Bishop of Caesarea in 313. He is known, not so much as a "Church Father" but as the "Father of Church History." His specialty was separating the true canon of Scripture from all the bogus stuff. He confirms the authorship of Hebrews in his "Ecclesiastical History Chapter III The Epistles of the Apostles." The Epistles of Paul were so well known in the church, that he didn't even bother to name them:
"The Epistles of Paul are 14, all well known and beyond doubt."
The 14 Epistles of Paul were each named a few years later by Athanasius AD367. Similar to Eusebius, He prefaces his list by almost apologizing over tedium of recording them yet once again, something that had been so frequently recorded 'from the beginning':
Athanasius Archbishop of Alexandria Easter/Festal Epistles Letter xxxix
"5. Again it is not tedious to speak of the [books] of the New Testament. These are, the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Afterwards, the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles (called Catholic), seven, viz. of James, one; of Peter, two; of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are fourteen Epistles of Paul, written in this order. The first, to the Romans; then two to the Corinthians; after these, to the Galatians; next, to the Ephesians; then to the Philippians; then to the Colossians; after these, two to the Thessalonians, and that to the Hebrews; and again, two to Timothy; one to Titus; and lastly, that to Philemon. And besides, the Revelation of John."
