Can you say that there are good adventures? Absolutely, you can.
You can also recognise that there are adventures that while you like them, they are flawed and did not appeal to the wider gaming public.
Vecna: Eve of Ruin fulfils one basic requirement of an adventure: it is playable. You can go from the beginning to the end with the adventure as written, and complete it. This is not true of every adventure. Some adventures are so horribly broken that you can't go from the beginning to the ending.
The trouble Eve of Ruin has, much like Descent into Avernus, is that the path through the adventure doesn't really make logical sense. The links are there, but if you start thinking about them, they don't really hold together very well. At least in Eve of Ruin, once you get on the quest for the Rod, it sustains itself. You're not continually wondering why you're following a forgetful hollyphant who keeps giving you bad advice. The hook in Eve of Ruin that gets you on the path to the Rod? Argh!
And, of course, the actual content of each of Eve of Ruin's chapters is typically designed to enrage anyone familiar with those settings. (Not true of every chapter, but enough of them).
What makes a great adventure? It really helps if it has a really brilliant concept. And then the execution matters as well.
I still regard Gygax's Giant/Drow series as a classic. It leaves a lot up to the DM - especially when you hit D3 - but there is huge creativity there. Revelation after revelation after revelation. Each of the giant strongholds ups the complexity and difficulty, and then - all of a sudden - the great reveal of the drow. And that wasn't it, because through D1-3 we get to see what lies beneath the surface of the world, and the cultures that exist there.
Ravenloft, the original Tracy and Laura Hickman creation, is a damn fine dungeon, but it's elevated in its use of Strahd as a foe, and in the reading of the deck which means each time through it's a different experience.
The amazing thing is that Curse of Strahd doesn't come off as inferior. Instead, I - and quite a few others - prefer it to the original. But you need to know that it isn't the same as the original. Where Ravenloft was a dungeon crawl, Curse of Strahd becomes far more of the exploration of the effects that Strahd's rule and darkness has had on the people of his land. I know some run it as horror, but for me, the horror is that of seeing these broken people. (Honestly, I prefer running it as a heroic tale where the darkness will be broken forever by the party's actions - which is the original Ravenloft's concept as well. Not the later reenvisioning where everything resets and the party's actions mean nothing).
Is Curse of Strahd challenging to run? Absolutely - as is Vault of the Drow. Not all DMs will get it. But what I can say is that a lot of DMs get it and love the adventure.
It's always worth remembering that most DMs don't use published adventures - and don't connect with them in any meaningful way.
