Curry is unreal, that's for sure. He's also unreal in a system that's designed to get him shots. Nothing wrong with that, of course, and I think team basketball is much to be preferred over isolation and one-on-one (90s basketball was frequently pretty unwatchable) but by the same token, the team should get more of the credit than the individual.
Sure, but by the same token, that team basketball is also leveraging Curry in ways '90s/'00s basketball didn't leverage Jordan and Kobe. Curry's gotten a lot of press for his "gravity," which has led to numerous 4-on-3s for the Warriors below the break. While Jordan and Kobe certainly attracted attention, their lack of Curry-like range limited how much they opened up the court for their teammates. I think that a proper accounting of how much Curry owes success to the rest of his team (some) and how much the rest of his teammates owe success to Curry (more) would actually put even more value in Curry's bucket overall.
Not just size: Curry is athletic for your average human (even very athletic) but he's just average for the NBA. Jordan was one of the most athletic players ever. Plus he had an intimidation factor only rivaled by Gary Payton.
I'd put Pippen in that class (and a superior defender to either, but since we're talking only perceptions in that last line, he probably didn't out-class them in "fear"), but that's a perfectly fair point that I'll cede.
It's also interesting that a couple of PGs have really gone at Curry and outscored him - Lowry and Lillard. If that happened to Jordan, I must've missed it. I was rooting for it to happen every time, because I hated him.
The Bulls rarely tasked Jordan to take on the other team's best scorer, because they had Pippen for that. I wouldn't remotely suggest that it's because Jordan couldn't have done well in general, but I'm relatively sure they wanted not to overwork Jordan on both ends. I do remember Jordan getting into "scoring duels" with players he was primarily responsible for (which is a euphemistic way to say neither player could stop the other), but I can't remember names and dates anymore.
(The contrast between him and LeBron in the finals is instructive. Curry was probably the MVP of the Warriors simply because of how much effort the Cavs exerted to stop him. However, the fact remains that they did slow him down considerably. Meanwhile LeBron was like the Incredible Hulk out there despite losing the only other teammates who could score, so the Warriors could focus on him exclusively. I don't see Jordan being remotely troubled by Matthew Delevedova.
James put up incredible raw numbers, but his efficiency was terrible. James' scoring was basically by dint of taking tons and tons of shots, inefficiently. I'd still call it an impressive performance, because the other options were worse, it still required a lot of strength and effort.
I don't think it's fair, though, to ding Curry for being "troubled by Delevedova." Delevedova was never responsible for Curry by himself, his responsibility was always to channel him towards help. Curry has always been pretty happy to pass the ball to teammates who are open and the Cavaliers' entire defensive philosophy was to force the ball out of Curry's hands. Even this season, when he's gone full supernova, he's had 19-23 points in easy victories because he's been content to pass out of double teams 30 feet from the hoop, letting Green trigger a 4-on-3. I would think this would be a mark in his favor with you!
Honestly, stylistically and in terms of mentality, I'd really compare Curry more to Magic Johnson. Yes, his scoring and size don't suggest the comparison, but his desire to thrill, willingness to create for others and obvious joy he takes in playing the game are very comparable, in my opinion. In reality, there really isn't a clean comparison between Curry and anyone in the past.