I don't know who were expecting an easy win at Mestalla. We were able to match their intensity (something we wouldn't have been able to just a year ago) and had much better chances (0.19 - 2.33 xg).
Some improvements in the attacking play but chemistry and sharpness still pretty poor.
He's been in charge for 38 La Liga games now (a whole season) and has won 87 points. I'd say that's acceptable if not impressive.
That's my level headed response
I guess here's the thing results wise :
His Liga performance : Acceptable
Knockout performance : Terrible
Overall performance : Bad?
So where does that leave us on the evaluation of him as a coach, considering the team don't play very good football and we haven't seen him really improve or develop any players. For example, if he had phased out Busquets completely and built a fluid and coherent midfield without him so far, I would be more sympathetic to some blips because at least he is progressing the rebuild of the team and building patterns of play.
But he isn't, and are these results good enough to justify lack of development of the team? Many said Valverde's Ligas were not enough due to bad playstyle and lack of progression of the team's play.