New Yorker fiction editors: This is the best you've got?

You're the fiction editor of The New Yorker, probably the best read and most distinguished general-interest magazine in the world, one of the very few anyway that still publishes fiction, you have about 50 issues a year, meaning there's no reason you shouldn't be publishing the 50 best stories in the world every year, right? And sometimes I have to just shrug my shoulders and say: This's the best you've got? I do admire the NYer editors for a few things: they have recently made an effort to publish actual short stories and not novel excerpts, which half the time are basically like movie travelers touting a book about to be released. They are interested in world literature and have increasingly sought out stories in translation, often by writers little known in the U.S. (Cesar Aira a recent example). But this week, an Israeli writer named E. Keret (I think), a story called Creative Writing - come on. The very short story is about a couple, recently lost a child through miscarriage, woman enrolls in writing course, writes three stories, each of which Keret summarizes briefly, each sounds like it could be a good Murakami story (e.g., woman gives birth to a cat), but they're not stories, their ideas, sketches. Then the man enrolls in a course, writes a story about a businessman who's actually a fish. He can't come up with an ending for the story. End of story. Honestly, conceptually this might be a good idea if the "creative writing" of the man and woman revealed something to us or to them about them or their relationship or their ability or their inability to communicate, or it it lead to change, brought them together, or apart, or something - but this story is only half-told, if that - it's a story that would show a lot of promise in a workshop (and maybe that's the point? is there a deep and underlying irony that I'm missing, a story about workshops that is a workshop story?) - but is it one of the best stories of the year? I don't think so.