That's not really reasonable. Marx specifically said that, as the new system emerges from the confines of the old, it will reproduce some of its flaws. The means of production were in the hands of the workers via the regional economic councils; the economy was planned; there didn't exist a single trace of private initiative in the economy. What it was, was an economy moving onward on the path towards communsim. Now, it made mistakes (the Khrushchev era is more valuable for the general direction of the USSR during this period than it is for the leadership skills of the actual man in question), but under no circumstances can an honest man call it capitalist, state or otherwise. There was no capitalist relation in existence in USSR during this period; not property relation, not in terms of initiative and not in terms of planning of production.
