The Filibuster and Bad Long-Term Planning

There's been a decent amount of debate on the Right about the potential negative consequences of using the "nuclear option". I'm curious if there's been a similar discussion on the Left about the long-term risks of filibustering judicial nominations in the first place?

Assume the nuclear option fails, and the Senate effectively endorses the idea that judicial nominations can be filibustered. Eventually, Democrats are going to regain control of the Senate and the Presidency simultaneously. What kind of judges are they going to be able to get past a Deep South/Plains States filibuster? Given that conservatives have a systemic advantage in the Senate (all those thinly populated "square states") is it really in the Democrats' long-term interest to institute a 60-vote floor for judicial nominations?