This is a tough one for me. I would say Undertaker for his longevity, but Kane for his peak. It's like Roger Clemens v. Pedro Martinez with Taker being Clemens and Kane being Pedro. I think Kane had 4-5 years in which he was a BETTER wrestler than the Undertaker has ever been. Man, the guy was doing hurricanrannahs, tilt-o-whirls slams, double suplexes (one guy in each arm), dropkicks, you name it. All this for a guy who is actually bigger than Taker. What he did in that stretch was simply unprecedented and hasn't been matched.
I don't believe that taking the mask off has "ruined" Kane I think it has been the booking. The first few months after Kane demasked were simply awesome. Kane had the top and the makeup around his eyes and was just as intimidating as ever. He sat up from the Stunner and chokeslammed Stone Cold, Threw Bishoff off the stage, and came to the ring in chains.
The problem is that, over the last few years, Kane has been used as a veteran whose sole purpose is to put over youngsters. Whether that's Kane's choice or the WWE's, it has certainly been frustrating for fans of Kane. Taker, on the other hand, has remained dominant in the booking department. As for their entrances, I will always prefer Kane's original entrance to any other entrance in WWE history, with the Brood's a close second.
