I think it's very easy and potentially problematic to focus on too-narrow a category for your specialties.

To flagrantly steal an example from SlateStarCodex, examine basketball players. Professional basketball players tend to be tall. Several standard deviations taller than the general population. There is a definite, verifiable link between increased height and increased basketball success.

However, the most successful pro basketball players are not necessarily the tallest. Michael Jordan was not the tallest player in his environment, but was absolutely in the running for being the best. Success in basketball is related to a number of factors, height being only one. General athleticism, spatial awareness, strategic thinking, willingness to train diligently, and so forth are also important. A person who is above average in multiple relevant factors may be a stronger overall player than another person who surpasses him in one factor but falls behind in the rest.

The same is plausibly true in other fields. A person who is two deviations above average in medical skill and two deviations above average in social skills might easily be more successful than a person who is three deviations above average in medical skill and completely average in social skills. The may be more utility in having multiple synergistic skillsets than one exceedingly strong skillset.