Head flow,vs. cam lift?......

I guess using the analogy of Super Stock was what led me to think of this as a more indepth technical thing.
If the idea is to keep it simple and very generalized - if the cam used gets the heads into their power range, and assuming the heads are properly sized for the application and expected output - then it is less critical that the fatter low and mid-level lift ranges are used.
However - the faster rate of lift cams can smooth out the power curves which are exactly what street engines typically want and need to allow for compromises in gearing, convertor, and vacuum assisted options like brakes. I like using catalog grinds, and some favorites of mine were designed in the early 80s. They take less valve spring (which "frees up" power at the crank) and I can make the same peak power. But as those get larger - the "oldschool" nature becomes more evident and you start to have to think about gearing up, etc. and live with low idle vacuum. Where a modern design can make the same or more peak power by opening the valve faster and keeping it open longer while maintaining vacuum levels at idle and bringing in the torque earlier.
Look at it this way - if the same 4" ID pipe is used with a flap on the end that seals tight - you can open the flap 60% and keep it open for 10 seconds - or you can open it 30% and keep it open for 20 seconds. Either way assuming the pressure in the pipe is the same the total volume allowed to pass the flap will be equal.