Visually the course is different but it still has the same great bones. If the GD raters couldn't see that before the restoration, well...
Ryan I'm not a rater but maybe the ratings criteria in the Golf Digest process most impacted by the bones (shot values, resistance to scoring and design variety) have not changed much but the ones most impacted by the renovation have improved (memorability, aesthetics, conditioning and ambiance).
I'm not saying that's the case, just that it is a possibility. Trying to make a subjective thing objective is impossible. I know I have a hard time discerning a really good course with ok conditioning from a pretty good course with pretty good conditioning. Throw in hundreds of other courses and I'll disagree with my own rankings.
For a time I ranked each course I played based on the 7 Golf Digest criteria and it didn't end up how I would rack and stack them subjectively, which changes.
What that says about me, well...