Yes, Genghis, I have certainly flown some planes I liked for "nice" handling, so I guess they were "good", as long as my assessment was in the role they were designed for. I've certainly flown a few planes whose handling was not likeable in any phase of flight - so they would not get a "good". I suppose one element of "good" would be "acceptable" over a wide operational range.
The Piper Cheyenne II was nice to fly in a rather narrow operational range. At other corners (like approach, and over 20,000' altitude), it was not at all nice. It would not get a "good" from me. It ended up getting a stability augmentation system from Piper.
I once tested a Cessna 206 with a very hard to detect hidden pitch trim rigging error. It was a very short, near fatal control problem, which has occurred a few times since, and been well documented - one was Transport Canada's own C 206! The C 206 is a decent hauler, but not nice to fly - certainly a compromise.