I mean, I guess there's rankings for a reason , but I don't know how any draft pick who was picked somewhere near where he was ranked can be rightly shat on until years later, let alone the day it was made. Unless you're reaching for a kid numerous rounds before he's expected to be picked, it's still almost entirely a crapshoot. How can a crapshoot be right or wrong without the benefit of hindsight?
There is a consensus best pick overall leading up to and including the draft. Combine that with team needs and you can fluctuate a bit of course.
There are draft tiers as well. Groupings of prospects considered generational, star, 1st line, 2nd... etc.
At the time of the selection Broberg for example was well outside being the BPO, was not playing a position of team need, and was clearly 1 or 2 tiers below Zegras for example.
You should, IMO, have an opinion based off of a players draft pedigree AND then also in hindsight determine if he was the right pick.
I actually think shitting on a pick at the time of the draft has more merit than down the road. It's embarrassing imo that Bob McKenzie's concesnsus list is typically more successful than most teams lists.