Matt,
Oh, I probably wouldn't even answer this if Tommy N was still around!
But, yes, the ability to move earth pretty cheaply, and maybe even moreso, the advent of lightweight but strong PVC pipe which reduced piping costs tremendously opens up some venues of design.
When I entered the biz in 1977, the mantra was to only put a catch basin where there was no other option to get the water out -, i.e., a true natural low, or one that you created no matter how hard you tried not to. About that time, JN and other tour pros were ramping up the involement in design, and the idea that the course should help you, thus containment, which often required basins came into play. As chipping areas, etc . came into vogue, the ability to shape them in innumurous ways and drain them also helped (or hurt, depending on your POV)
No question that earthmoving/drainage on a either flat or too hilly site can help design. Certainly, the ability to flatten cross slopes on fw to under 10% (of 5% depending on who you talk to) makes a sloping site more useful for golf. As I have said before, generally, if drainage and earthmoving costs the same, its the most efficient solution for draining flat properties. On hilly properties, catch basins can be used to slow down drainage velocity, greatly reducing erosion.
As to aiding lesser talents, I believe the use of earth features and catch basins in fw, chipping areas, etc. is mostly a style choice for a gca. I think most could figure out a way to avoid catch basins if they wanted to, but don't want to.