Is my research statement supposed to lead to papers in top journals? I'm about to start a 2-year postdoc in math with a possibility to stay a 3rd year. This means I will probably be on the job market in one year. I am planning to apply for tenure-track research positions. As I understand it, to get a tenure-track offer I should try to get at least one paper in a top journal. When I look at my research statement, I don't think I have projects that will lead to papers in, say, the Annals or JAMS or Duke. I listed a few projects that I think can get done quickly but are basically extensions of other people's papers, the idea being that these are "low-hanging fruit." I also listed some long-term ideas but they are speculative and aren't concrete problems. If I follow the research statement I probably won't have a paper in a top journal. Am I doing something wrong?

Edit: I should also add that my letter writers all looked at my research statement (they requested it) and didn't say that anything was off.
You do the best you can do with the ideas you have.  Most very good mathematicians can’t come up with a JAMS worthy result every year, and it’s harder when you’re just out of graduate school.  You do need to spend some time on some more ambitious ideas as a postdoc, but “more ambitious” doesn’t mean JAMS-worthy and there’s luck in which ideas pay off and when there’s an unexpected connection that turns up when you’re in the middle of a project.

Yes if you want a job at a top place you might need top publications, but all you can do is do your best with the ideas you have the expertise you developed.  Most of us only get a couple publications at that level in our life.  Aim to be productive and to increase the level of your publications, but thinking about how to get into JAMS or the Annals isn’t helpful.