This is not even a question that can be answered by more than a dozen people on this site. Tom Doak, Tom Paul, Pat Mucci, Matt Ward, and a few others might be able to intelligently answer this question. Very few others have enough of a sample size for most designers to comment on this and have any weight to their opinion. I should say that you would need to have seen 5-6 of a designers best courses in order to determine how well the designer works over the long term. Obviously Cypress Point is not representative of MacKenzie's work; it was said on here once that a 'grandmother' could have designed one of the 5 best courses in the world given that site. So if CPC was the only MacKenzie one had ever seen, he would be in no position to comment on how good a designer he was in general. Same with Macdonald and NGLA, or Flynn and Shinnecock, or even Mr. Doak at Pacific Dunes.
Something you also have to consider is how many know how the holes were originally designed to play? Think of this a hole that is 340 yards long at NGLA, Merion, or any number of other older courses, if it was originally designed that length and it still that length today, plays worlds different today than it did in 1925. So, I think that changes the way holes are designed. Holes aught to be designed differently if they are intended to accept wedge shots or 7 iron shots. That is one of the primary critiques of #7 at ANGC, the green doesn't suit the shot.