One of the options when flagging is "very low quality". What should that be used for? Does it include bad/misleading/unsupported answers?
It's rarely needed, and it's definitely not for wrong answers, even if they seem really obviously wrong to you. That's what downvotes are for, and please use them liberally. Very low quality flags are not "super-downvotes".
The flag description pretty much says it:
This question/answer has severe formatting or content problems. This question/answer is unlikely to be salvageable through editing, and might need to be removed.
Use it if we can't figure out how to even turn it into something that answers the question (whether or not we agree with the answer) - maybe it's totally incomprehensible, maybe it's difficult to understand and the author isn't responding to comments. For this reason, the flag is only even an option on posts with zero or negative score and only on posts less than 7 days old.
If it doesn't actually answer the question, just flag as "not an answer".
We as moderators definitely don't want to be in the business of deciding unilaterally which answers are bad enough to be worth deleting. Yes, we delete things that don't actually answer the question, but good vs bad is a lot more of a gray area. We may often vote and comment to make our views known, but that's very different from deletion.
So if you think something might genuinely need our intervention, by all means flag. But if it's just a bad answer, please downvote - you have the power to handle it, you don't need us.
See also Your answer is in another castle: when is an answer not an answer? on network-wide meta.