I think Frank can do the fundamentals well. Can he bring players on, make them better players? He's taken some average but talented attacking footballers and turned into superstars. So yes I think Frank would help Solanke, Johnson, Odebert etc and help develop them into much more potent players. Whilst Ange was a great psychologist and motivator, I don't think he was a superb analyst and coach in that he could bring more out of a player. Frank I think does.
Then space, tactics and positioning on the pitch. I don't really need to say anything here. Under Frank we'd cover the space intelligently. The situations we were in every 10 mins during Postecoglou games where we're open and sprinting around madly to try to keep things under control, wouldn't arise under Frank. We'd cover the pitch in a much more efficient and effective way imo. The simplist way I can express this is throw ins. Amazingly under Ange we'd almost let the opposition have freedom to throw the ball to a team mate, mostly uncontested - because we didn't have an effective shape, our press left us at sea, it wasn't nuanced or clever (pressing only sometimes). Frank has a much more structured positional way to setup a side. This is the main reason we didn't win more games under Ange bless him. I respect Postecoglou's purity and intent, but the strain on players and the inefficiency wasn't working. So we weren't playing 'ange-ball' anymore. And I'd prefer a manager who has experience playing the way Ange was setting us up in the end, and doing it better!