It depends a lot on what one shoots and how one works and how configurable the AF system is.
For me it's a no brainer - the more the merrier and I can always limit the number of selectable points if need be. You can't ever expand if there aren't enough points to begin with. Shift, focus and recompose is often a compromise in accuracy, and under certain circumstances, simply not an option.
When working in manual focus with electronic focus confirm like when working with TSE or PC-E lenses, or chipped adapters, having more points means that I can select, with a lot more precision, exactly where and what I want in focus. Moving the camera/viewfinder is exceedingly counter-productive when working with technical lenses and results in gross inaccuracy. Having 45 or 51 points to select from made that a breeze and it worked (for me) even with moving on the streets candids. I've also used that for running/jumping kids shot with TSE lenses.
Another important factor related to an earlier comment is that AF performance depends a lot on how well one understands how the AF system was designed to think and react. Sometimes, it's not a matter of having 45 or 51 AF points and that would guarantee near-perfect results say in high-speed sports photography even in bright daylight. Under different circumstances and lighting, I need to tailor the way my AF points behave in order to increase keeper rates.
I'm not sure about the D700 and how many micro-processors it uses for what functions, but on the whole, I find AF a lot more aggressive on Nikon's upper end bodies as compared to Canon's. Sometimes, I wished I had that aggressiveness and sometimes, not. NO, this is NOT a brand war so please DON'T make it one! What I do know is that on Canon's famed 1D2 body, the AF is highly configurable and that body uses two micro-processors instead of one to handle AF and other camera functions separately = faster performance and responsiveness. What I do know about the D700 is that it's quite a bit easier to manual focus on the groundglass using the stock screen from firsthand experience and that the AF works quite wonderfully from what I hear!
TS, if you really want to know more, try and find the technical papers usually written by outside engineers and consultants about how a particular camera's AF system works in real life. As for your original question, only you can decide what works better, and not, for you and under your own circumstances and such. Assuming a fair degree of understanding has been reached, buy your next camera suited to YOUR needs instead of what's the latest and greatest or what others say.