Better in-ring performer: Rollins, Orton, or HHH?

[Dat Dude]

These three have held the distinction of having runs as the top workhorse heels, but at their peak who put on the best matches?

Triple H



or

Randy Orton



or

Seth Rollins

[Bo Rida]

HHH - I think some people forget how good he was before his injury. He was still damn good after.

Seth - I'm not sure he's reached his peak yet, I don't feel right voting for his work in six-man tags.


Orton - I don't think he was ever consistent enough as a "workhorse heel" even during the times he was motivated. Mostly because he often stinks the place out deliberately.

[mizerable]

Uh, why is Trips a part of this discussion? The dude was great when he was a midcarder as well as his first 18 months as a main eventer, however his quad injury impaired him dramatically. In fact his comment about wrestling a broomstick...dude NEVER had a broomstick moment. He was always in the ring with people who were on his level or above his level. He never had a broomstick moment the way that Orton and Rollins did. People might argue that he did it with Batista, and I'd argue that he did his part in putting him over, but I wouldn't exactly call it a quality performance, he just did his part, which is fine.

Orton is a very good worker when motivated. He's had some stinkers in a lot of matches where the stakes were PPV matches, and a lot of times he was the person at fault.

I gotta go with Rollins even though he hasn't had the run that both Orton and Trips did. He has yet to have a *bad* match, and in my opinion was the workhorse that carried the Shield to so many quality matches during their run. He's proven to be a quality singles' wrestler too.

[Mid-Carder]

Orton for me, no contest. He's one of the best storytellers and sellers ever and is smooth as anything. No flash but a lot of substance

[Clash, Never a Meter Maid]

All three can be amazing when motivated. As for HHH's "broomstick moments", I'd say he was a bit better at putting a great match together than Foley and Rock, as much as I love them both, and he brought out the best in them.

[Deleted]

To me HHH was just good and I never really found Orton entertaining. So yeah definitely Seth.

[Cyno]

I think Triple H was a master of ring psychology as a heel. Not so much as a face, but in his prime he was just great. I think Rollins can get there, but he isn't yet. And Orton's a bit underrated and he has his moments, but I don't think he's ever been great.

[bob]

Seth by a country mile and I don't think he's anywhere close to his peak yet

[Raskovnik]

Rollins will be the best, but as of now it's Triple H.

[audiencewatching]

HHH as much as it pains me.

[Instant Classic]

Rollins is too early to tell. Triple H.

[Bo Rida]

Dec 8, 2014 17:44:54 GMT -5 Mid-Carder said:

Orton for me, no contest. He's one of the best storytellers and sellers ever and is smooth as anything. No flash but a lot of substance

Just out of interest what do you consider his prime?
(Personally I'd say the period leading up to his WM match with HHH)

Dec 8, 2014 17:40:51 GMT -5 mizerable said:

In fact his comment about wrestling a broomstick...dude NEVER had a broomstick moment. He was always in the ring with people who were on his level or above his level. He never had a broomstick moment the way that Orton and Rollins did.

Although by no means bad wrestlers HHH did have some surprisingly enjoyable matches with the likes of Kaientai and the Brooklyn Brawler.

As a slight tangent around the same time there was also a few good multi-man tags with The Radicalz, although he didn't carry them you could argue he got them over (or at least Benoit anyway).

[whatamaneuver]

HHH has admittedly had a longer career than both, but he's had by far the most memorable matches.

Neither Orton or Rollins have work that compares to HHH's at WM20 vs Benoit + HBK, Royal Rumble 2000 vs Cactus Jack, Three Stages of Hell vs Austin, Summerslam 2002 vs HBK or WM27/WM28 vs Taker

To be fair, Rollins is only two years into his WWE career and is at a higher level than HHH was two years into his. However, Orton's first two years were better than HHH's. But his first 10 years were nothing on HHH's.

[Mid-Carder]

Dec 8, 2014 17:57:40 GMT -5 Bo Rida said:

Dec 8, 2014 17:44:54 GMT -5 Mid-Carder said:

Orton for me, no contest. He's one of the best storytellers and sellers ever and is smooth as anything. No flash but a lot of substance

Just out of interest what do you consider his prime?
(Personally I'd say the period leading up to his WM match with HHH)

Dec 8, 2014 17:40:51 GMT -5 mizerable said:

In fact his comment about wrestling a broomstick...dude NEVER had a broomstick moment. He was always in the ring with people who were on his level or above his level. He never had a broomstick moment the way that Orton and Rollins did.

Although by no means bad wrestlers HHH did have some surprisingly enjoyable matches with the likes of Kaientai and the Brooklyn Brawler.

As a slight tangent around the same time there was also a few good multi-man tags with The Radicalz, although he didn't carry them you could argue he got them over (or at least Benoit anyway).

If we're talking purely in-ring, it would be 2011 for me

[benstudd]

I was never a huge fan of his but Orton by what I've seen so far have been the best of the three. HHH has been good but a lot of times he's been limited by his freak roid body and having to stay into the early 2000 "WWE style". When motivated Orton can be unreal in the ring and has had to face many different opponents in various eras, transitioning from the early 2000 style and to being able to hang with the guys now. And I feel that when he's on, he can bring on the heat like nobody else(that is why I wouldn't mind seeing him in a program with Lesnar. Those matches would surprise people, I think). As far as Seth, I have not seen enough of him in solo to come up with a calculated opinion of him.

[This Player Hating Mothman]

Triple H right now, but if Seth stays on the career trajectory he's on now, he's going to be a lock for a Hall of Fame headline-caliber career and far exceed the other two.

[deancubed]

The answer of course, is Edge.

But since he has been forgotten by most, I'll have to give it to Orton - if only because Orton didn't have the caliber of opponents that Rollins and HHH both got. Rollins gets to show off with faces that are exciting because they aren't John Cena, HHH was at his peak in the 'good old days' before John Cena and it's hard to stink the place up against Stone Cold, Rock, Foley, and Taker. Orton had to carry a show built around Cena or the absence of Cena during a time when casual and lapsed fans were sick of WWE and Cena, and his opponents tended to be (but obviously weren't all) B-Listers. So Orton did the most with what he was given. So far, because Rollins is just starting.

[SeVeN: #TheBadGuy.]

*Points at sig*


The King of Kings of course.

Ortons best matches in my opinion were with Daniel Bryan. Everything else has been...meh. He's just never done it for me.

Seth, he hasn't had any duds yet, but he also hasn't done anything memorable yet, IMO.

[Deleted]

Rollins really has yet to wow me on any sort of consistent level. He's very good and he's had some damn fine matches, but a lot of the time lately he keeps falling into the trap of just being in dull filler matches. Then there's Orton, who when he has a fire lit under him is amazing but more often than not phones it in, plus he has the issue that he has to have good chemistry with somebody for a match to work out. Put him against someone he doesn't click with and there's no salvaging it.

So yeah, I have to go Triple H. He's had his fair share of damn fine matches, arguably more all-time classics than anybody honestly. He's had some absolute disasters in his career too and some periods where he was pretty trashy but when Triple H wants to deliver he does.

[TGM]

How is this even a question?

Look at HHHs peak year in 2000 and nobody was having better matches.

It's still too early for Rollins to have peaked but he's had an amazing rookie year and beyond.