Obviously doctors are still good, and don't need to be doing research to make the world a better place. I agree that dismissing 'plumbing' programmers or 'rote' doctors would be a serious mistake. But... well, I can't help drawing some connections between programmers implementing already-broken security, and doctors putting in heart stents that don't actually help patients.
I don't think we're just being metaphorical here, I think research vs practice doctors often show the same patterns as programmers, for the same reasons. Creating new knowledge is neither necessary nor sufficient for keeping up with other people's knowledge, but we seem to be worryingly bad at keeping people who implement that knowledge up to date.
(Context on the doctors: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2017/02/when-evid...)
The business doesn't care about your toolset, probably. What they care about is solving a problem.
I've met no small number of very gifted, very creative developers that had this same mindset -- didn't give a crap about the Cool New Language or pure CS, but really DID get excited about building connections and features within existing systems to solve business problems.
These two visions of development are in tension. Few folks can get jobs writing Haskell or Lisp, but there are LOTS of jobs for .NET developers.
Neither path necessarily makes a better developer, though.