I'm not a fan of comparing a guy who is 21 to his peers from his draft class--either to suggest he's doing fine or to suggest he's struggling. Until everyone in the draft class is 25-26, it's not really apparent what guys "truly" are. Some guys surprise and make it to the NHL at 19 and 20, and some of them become stars; others never really develop much beyond that or even regress. Some guys take several years to develop and don't even make it to the NHL until 23 or 24 (or later) and have career peaks that occur much later than a lot of their peers. And basically everything in between.
Looking at the rest of a guy's class can be an interesting visualization of where everyone stands, but it doesn't say anything about where a guy is developmentally. I mean in Othmann's case we can use the draft board to largely defend him, but if he looked like absolute dog shit, does the draft board matter? Or if he looks like a budding star in Hartford but he ends up blocked because, I don't know, Reilly Smith is playing like a stud, what does the draft board say then?