I've come to the following conclusion regarding good and bad lawyers.
A bad lawyer often tells you what you want to hear. This happens regardless of whether the issue involves prospects in litigation, attacking the other side, deciding whether a deal is worth pursuing or determining whether or not your position on an issue is rational. Whatever the issue, he or she is happy to appease the client and just keep the process going. He or she is not driven by client results. This lawyer can always chalk his efforts up to lawyering fully for a client.
A good lawyer is willing to tell you what you don't want to hear, even if it means settling the dispute, and doesn't please you emotionally. He or she is willing to tell you, "This is good enough." They will assess whether a point isn't worth a death fight and whether an approach carries too much regulatory risk. They are willing to tell clients, "Don't throw good money after bad."
Good lawyers are high on common practical sense and not just fighting or negotiating to the nth degree. Good lawyers constantly find ways to cut to the chase and provide the information you need to make sound decisions as a client. They try and fight, but also try and solve problems. Often, they do both on parallel paths.
People often don't love their great lawyers and instead applaud their bad lawyers, who cater to client machoism.
It is a fascinating subject to watch play out.