It's a very simple stat not sure how its misleading. It does not claim the QB is all that's needed. To me its points out when reading between the lines those teams are drafting there because they're bad at building and coaching teams up.
My biggest question is how many teams had multiple of those picks.
The obvious implication is that if you draft a QB in the top 5, you're not likely to win a Super Bowl with that QB. The underlying implication is that you shouldn't draft a QB in the top 5. That's where this twitter post is leading the you. Status as a bad organization being the reason you got there is reading between the lines but that's not where this stat is leading you. Hence if you don't add context, it's misleading.
Also the reason why this is not just a simple stat and is intentionally misleading is in all the ways it had to be perfectly cherry picked to be technically true:
1) A QB drafted in the top 5 just won the Super Bowl. In fact QBs drafted in the top 5 have won 2 out of the last 5 Super Bowls but yes not by the team they were drafted by
2) Brady and Mahomes have won 10 out of the last 26 Super Bowls leaving limited space available in this sample size
3) Peyton won a Super Bowl since 2000 but yes he was drafted before 2000
4) A QB drafted in the top 5 by their original team has been to 5 out of the last 11 Super Bowls
5) Eli not being drafted by the Giants is just a technicality since the only difference is that he was traded immediately after the pick and not before the pick was made
It's just reminiscent to me of those misleading stats that announcers say to fill time like teams that have a rusher with 20+ carries is far more likely to win the game. But they're running the ball more in the second half because they already have the lead and are trying to run the clock out, so of course they're more likely to win the game.