I agree with you.  The superdelegate seems inherently wrong.  The Democrats are better off running Sanders if he wins (even if he loses to Trump).  Trump would be gone in 4 years, or maybe even sooner given his age.  And the Democrats would be well-positioned to win at that point.  

I fear we've reached a bigger problem than any of that.  The problem is that a great number of the truly capable, smart, and charismatic leaders in this country aren't able to make a go in politics.  That might be for several reasons:

1) Devaluing of the role post-Nixon, Clinton and others

2) The poisonous nature of partisan politics on both sides

3) The odd pushback against any kind of intellectual approach from the US proletariat

4) The insulting we-know-better tone taken by politicians (many Democrat) to try to sway the middle

None of these work in our favor, and quite frankly all of the major candidates this time have huge negatives.  Trump's are obvious.  Sanders simply has some bad ideas, even though I do think he comes across as engaged, charismatic, and honest.  (No drilling or mining?  None?  Anywhere?  GTFO).  Biden is clearly corrupt and possibly past his intellectual prime.  You'd have to be pretty dim to look at Hunter Biden's role in Ukraine and not see that as a blatant conflict of interest.  Warren's lecturing schoolmarm style is so deeply off-putting although I do admire fighting spirit she shows.  Her idea of forgiving student loans amounts to a giant giveaway to the doctor/lawyer class and doesn't have much to do with the working class she claims to support.  Most of those folks were smart enough to find lower-debt solutions (as I'm thinking about for my 17-year-old, who is already getting college credit in the Univ. of Texas system for Spanish IV and English Writing this year).  

It's like what I saw David Crosby say on stage (amidst a stunning concert) in 2016:  he basically put forth that the choice between Trump and Hillary was an awful one, and he was right.  Democrats should have let Sanders run then, and if he lost (he would have), they would be sitting pretty with a younger candidate now.  Question is, who is that younger face?  It's clearly not Beto, who isn't smart enough.  It's not Buttigieg, who is by far the best speaker to hear, but I truly don't think the country will elect a gay guy to President . . . yet.  Might not be far off.  He didn't bring enough accomplishments to the table anyway.  It's not Klobuchar, who stumbles over words and sounds scared witless any time she's challenged in a debate.  Comes across as nice and honest but not a leader in any way.  And while my choice might be Bloomberg, I can see the negatives and why some Democrats don't want to go there.  Tough times in what feels like a calcifying culture.