I don't disagree that drafting is hard and an inexact science, but I also know that consistently good teams draft a large number of their best players. The Pats don't hit on all of their picks, but they get contributions out of a lot of them, and a significant % of their best players are guys they drafted. Steelers are the same. Ravens are the same. Saints and Vikings. Chiefs and SF are more of where we are at but they also have hit on a ton of picks if you look at their starting lineups.
So, you accurate to say that we are not the worst. That said, we are also a team that has wasted a significant number of high draft picks and our record reflects that. Our three most successful recent draft picks are DJ Humphries and Budda Baker and Kyler Murray and people argue if two of them are actually good. We have too many Haason Reddicks and Robert Nkemdiches and Brandon Williams and Dorian Johnsons and Chad Williams and Hakeem Butlers for this team to be consistently good. Those players cost us cap dollars because we then have to sign vets to fill those roles. To consistently get little to no contribution from top 100 players is a sign of a bad process.
Example...
Since 2017 we have drafted 5 wide receivers
Chad Williams - 98
Christian Kirk - 47
Andy Isabella - 62
Hakeem Butler - 103
KeeSean Johnson - 174
Despite that we had to trade for our #1 WR. In that same period of time, Pittsburgh has drafted 4
JuJu Smith-Schuster - 62
James Washington - 60
Diontae Johnson - 66
Chase Claypool - 49
Just comparing those two groups, it is pretty clear that a traditionally better franchise does consistently better when allocating draft resources. Now you can argue that every team has position groups that it drafts better than others, but I don't know that we have one.
Long story short, we have to draft better if we are going to ever be a consistently good franchise.