I would not call the poker analogy lame - but it definitely is simplified. Perhaps even over simplified.
However, the author simplified the analogy in order to reach the economic illiterate, not to reach anyone who understand that wealth can be created.
The reason poker is a very bad analogy is it zero sum.. no wealth is created or destroyed... it is pure redistribution.. and you average socialist communist will love this analogy to be accepted as the truth.. fairness to them is banning poker..because the weak are getting hustled by the strong
But capitalism is not poker...capitalism is the creation of wealth.. the growth of wealth..
the proper analogy would be the farm... you plant a seed you labor over it and it return more then you put it... it benefits all because you created something new.... it is not zero sum