To be honest I thought his criticism of Thor in the Avengers was way to soft. For me it is a continuation of his use of Thor from his run. If your stomach does not churn with the prospect read some of Aaron's Thor material. young Thor was for the most part an arrogant fool though he did have cool moments. The first fight with Gorr comes to mind. Present Thor was the constantly whiny, loser, also drunken buffoon, that it was painful just to read. Meanwhile Jane/Thor was kicking butts and doing things that Thor himself was incapable of accomplishing. Old King Thor was a loser for millions of years and outside of a decent battle with Galactus which required the sword to win was pitiful. At one point Gorr defeated all three together. It was so bad that by the end of his run with the redemption that it did not even come across as a triumphant moment but just like spitting out a bad piece of fish. Glad it was over but still leaving a horrible aftertaste you can not get rid of for a long time. Then of course I realized Mr. Aaron was taking over Avengers and the whole bad fish analogy repeats itself. Not sure if that answers your question but it was the best I can do with the taste of rotted fugu still rolling around the subject.