Kuhn had some genuinely valuable insights. The paradigm shift thing was overstated--most science is incremental and even the paradigm shifts tend not to divorce one from the old model unless the old model was rubbish. And the degree to which incommensurate yet simultaneously satisfactory theories that have any differential consequences are possible wasn't adequately explored. But sometimes you really do have a revolution in a way that Popper or whomever didn't adequately capture.

The others...well...lots of very very grandiose factual claims (if you could even figure out what they were on about) accompanied by extremely scant evidence, and yes, they were quite influential.

But even though the public mindshare is disproportionately towards postmodern-style nonsense, scholarly philosophy to me seems more in the sensible or irrelevant vein, not the eloquently bamboozling style that's gotten a lot of play.