I think it's a mistake to rate architects, period. You can rate the courses we've done, but since you don't know how much of the credit for them should really go to us, it's a pointless exercise.
Ted, the number of courses you cite for MacKenzie is not a good representation. I think it's been verified over the years that he did many more than 49 new courses -- but more importantly, several of his top-100 courses [Royal Melbourne, Kingston Heath, Lahinch, even Crystal Downs] were renovations of greater or lesser degree. So you couldn't count them among his 49, even if 49 was the right number.
P.S. I did notice the % for Bill Coore is also way off ... Bill has five courses in the world top 100, the same as me. Hard to believe that someone at GOLF Magazine was that bad at counting. I wonder where David Kidd was when all this faulty math was being done ...