Adam,
The course is pretty good, yes. You wouldn't really pick it out as a Strantz although I think you can probably spot little things here and there. I believe it was a Ted Robinson design before, and you can still kind of see that origin. It's not extreme in the way that a number of Strantz courses are. It looks like a standard good golf course — not something that a maverick had his hands on.
There are many more good holes than bad ones — only awkward #10 sticks out, a sharply downhill reverse-camber dogleg resulting from the clubhouse being at the top of a fairly steep hill. I wouldn't say there are a lot of major strategic decisions, but plenty of subtle ones, and there's a mix of holes with width and a few that are modestly tight. Between the hills, some barrancas, and the design, it's definitely an aerial-type course.
The image below probably won't make a ton of fans on here, but I don't think that's really fair. It certainly is a big, fancy clubhouse, and everyone plays in carts, and there's a big waterfall on #18. (Incidentally, in both USGA qualifiers I've played there, we've played #18 as a par-3 from on top of the waterfall instead of a par-4 around it.)
I think this image of the par-3 #7 is more representative of the course in general:
Bottom line: it won't make your list of favorite courses, but you'll have a perfectly pleasant time playing it and probably think that 2 or 3 holes are really good.