Their height and weight differences justify the different style, though. Curry is 1.91 / 86kg, hard to penetrate inside with force since he lacks the mass.
Jordan and Kobe are both 1.98, you can compare them better.
The differences in their gifts also account for a lot. If Curry continues through his prime like he's played the past two seasons, he'll be the greatest shooter of all time. Kobe was never a great jump shooter but was remarkable at finding ways to get shots, as well as getting fouled.
Typically, in the NBA, the best scorers fit closer to the Kobe mold than Curry mold, Jordan and Lebron, for example. It will be interesting to see what influence Curry has on future generations and if others will follow his path like Kobe and Lebron followed Jordan's.
From what I hear, kids are now shooting long shots like Curry when they goof around, where my generation (I'm 34) used to like playing on lowered rims so we could dunk.
Curry is a great shooter that also benefits from the rule changes to give shooters more space outside the paint. I never liked the constant hand checking allowed, and am glad they stopped it. I wonder how Curry would fare in the 90s NBA given his smaller frame. I think he would still be a great shooter, but could he get his shot as easily? Debates like this are what makes sports fun.
It seems like a fairly common sentiment when comparing the '96 Bulls to '16 Warriors is that the Bulls would win under '96 rules and the Warriors would win under '16 rules.
There were also players who shot the ball extremely well before the three-point line took effect. Steph is averaging around 30 points per game with 5 three's a game. Without the additional point, it drops him to 25 points per game. Still good but probably not an MVP shoe-in anymore.
I think historical comparisons like this are just generally nostalgia. In general, players get better over time. There is more competition for a limited amount of slots, so the competition is more fierce. Players start training with better intelligence from an earlier age. They push harder. All things being equal (they seem to be on paper), the more recent team would have the advantage.
Removing the three point line would also detract from Durant, James (his shooting has been a big part of his game the second half of the season), and Westbrook. I think Curry would still be a major contender.
They all utilize the three, but none of them feature it quite like Curry. KD has a lot of shooting in his game, but Westbrook and Lebron are both relatively poor three-point shooters and don't shoot close to KD's volume, let alone Curry's.
Lebron and Westbrook's effectiveness of offense are largely based on getting to the rim. In fact, San Antonio has faced Lebron in three NBA finals and each time they deployed a strategy designed to tease Lebron into taking jumpers rather than drive or play inside. Doing that against Curry would be a death wish.
I've noticed this trend as well. I play pickup games with college students and noticed a major increase in the volume of three pointers. The game is definitely changing.
Jordan and Kobe are both 1.98, you can compare them better.