There are generally two types of architects: white collar and blue collar.
White collar architects are artists, and spend their time designing. Then they hand their sketches to structural engineers and say "Figure out how to build this." These are generally the folks architecture magazines write about.
Blue collar architects are more engineers and tradespeople, and see success as a building that fits the purposes of the client, in budget, in a pleasing way. They're more likely to repurpose a historical form, if it's well suited for the request at hand.
One of the central features of architecture meta is that white collars think blue collars lack creativity and intelligence, and blue collars think white collars are pompous pricks.
There are many famous architects who are famous precisely for the criteria you listed as 'blue collar' here: Peter Zumthor, Herzog & de Meuron, Rafael Moneo, Alvaro Siza. They tend to work from the construction of the building up, they repurpose historical buildings. They are also massively famous, teach at prestigious universities and write a lot of books (Zumthor excepted, although he is likely the most popular of all of these guys). The 'white collar' type you mention here seems to resemble Gehry the most, but as I've detailed in another comment is not considered a great architect.
White collar architects are artists, and spend their time designing. Then they hand their sketches to structural engineers and say "Figure out how to build this." These are generally the folks architecture magazines write about.
Blue collar architects are more engineers and tradespeople, and see success as a building that fits the purposes of the client, in budget, in a pleasing way. They're more likely to repurpose a historical form, if it's well suited for the request at hand.
One of the central features of architecture meta is that white collars think blue collars lack creativity and intelligence, and blue collars think white collars are pompous pricks.