I don't think DS must be flogged in public. I do believe that underlying his post there is some sort of professional jealousy or skepticism about the notion that a sort of cult like following of these proteges of the Coore-Crenshaw lineage has been growing. As I mentioned above, you can add Renaissance associates to that list due to some mingling.
DS seems most incredulous about the notion that perhaps Bunkerhill just goes out in the field and meander willy-nilly around a piece of ground until something strikes them as a good hole, then rough it out and move on to an undermined next hole. It seems DS is contrary and sideways about the possibility that there has been some more extemporaneous creativity on projects like Wild Horse and perhaps the front side of Bayside. I really can't say that is true (or false).
But, I know that Axeland is valued by C&C for his excellent field management of the construction process, and that doesn't indicate he is just meandering around out there without a clue. In fact, when he works for C&C, at places like Kapalua, or FH, 'm quite certain that they approached the projects with plenty of formal documents and construction-design plans to meet permit processes, etc. But, thank goodness these fellows do seem to be masters of adjusting on the fly.
I think there are two different types of architects-designers-constructors out there. There are those that place huge emphasis on documents, plan drawings, and buttoned down process that is run from an office like a business; and there are those that have a more on-site, on-the-ground focus and less chain of command between the designer-builders. The latter don't build a number of golf courses at a time or in one year. They don't live or operate in the hustling business world. They won't make a lot of serious money in their careers. And, as DS alludes to, they may not receive big multi-million dollar corporate project interests, because they do things the way they do and it is naturally contrary to the big corporate projects. Such projects are bottom line oriented and need the security of the big name - big business GCA firms like Fazio, Nicklaus, Palmer and the like to market and sell the project. Other business focused GCA firms model after that growth and competition side of the business. There is room and need out there for both approaches.
But, it would be a little far fetched to think that some of the masterful work Bunker Hill or the rest of the loose associations and combinations of design-builders will have their work "blowing or sucking" in the wind. They will be there for those that recognise craftsmanship and really thoughtful golf design at a rational price for a very long time to come. Quality never goes out of style.