Russell's teapot is a straw man. The supernatural is proposed as the explanation to empirically discernible results, such as the immense order we propose for there to have been at the beginning of the universe. Russell’s teapot would have no emperically discernible effects. The existence of the universe is an extraordinary piece of evidence, and providing an analogy with a less-than-extraordinary example (a teapot - of profound design but absent in power) is unconvincing.
Russell's teapot fails as an analogy against theism since there are too many categorical differences between the teapot and God. For example, the teapot is a contingent, physical entity (God isn't); and there is no reason to suppose that the teapot would be there rather than on Earth since it depends on Man for its creation.