but that is debatable
Everything is debatable. Even what were (or are) "bad parts" might have been good for many people.
Any version of js is a programming language and, as such, it can be used to make anything, using any feature of the language one sees fit. Bad patterns are in the one writing the code and are language-agnostic. Further, a "bad" pattern itself is only bad depending on context, and viceversa.
That's true for js before, now and after; it's true for any Turing-complete language.
That's why I've never agreed with the idea of "good" or "bad" parts of any language. It always sounds, to me, as an excuse for one's poor code. I doubt that bad code written because of the "bad parts" of a language would be any better in a language that doesn't (or is not considered to) have those "bad parts".
It's like if authors were to excuse bad reviews of their novels because the languages they wrote them in are "bad".
In short: Not really, because there's no "bad" js IMO; there are bad js coders, like in any other language.