Tim & David,
Sorry for the delay between posts, but I've been a little busy at Harding Park.
I stand on my post that #15 is a good, but not a "great" hole. I can think of several other holes at Canterbury that IMHO are superior, #1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 11 come quickly to mind. I always loved the back of number 12 green and how they camoflouged a fill slope by shaping small hummocks into a 4:1 slope.
As for golf sites, Canterbury is an excellent routing over a very good piece of farmland, but not unlike other northern Ohio courses designed on similar sites. Shaker and Highland Park share similar terrain, and the Country Club, Pepper Pike, Mayfield, Kirtland, et al are similarly blessed. I was the layout person at Sand Ridge in Chardon, and Quail Hollow and they both were great sites. Hell, I played a mom and pops course in Hinckly July 4th, and it was enjoyable simply bcs of the natural golfing terrain if for nothing else.
I always admired the site planning at Canterbury with the elegant entry drive winding its way past number nine and twelve. Talk about an entry statement, and the routung and finishing sequence is tremendous.
On the subject of blindness, I'm very flexible. There's mystery in things unseen, in moderation I guess. Number sixteen at Shaker is one of my favorites, and it's a par three not unlike the approach to #15 at Canterbury (#18 at SHCC is very similar also).
As for finishing sequences, I'd put the final four holes at Sand Ridge against Canterbury. I've yet to go back to play it, but that's a strong stretch of holes around a beautiful wetlands.