I can't think of a time when seeing someone's h-index created a discordant view of their impact. Or for that matter when reviewing someones annual cites was surprising.
I just think the Gestalt impression you generate about a scientist is going to correlate with most quantification measures.
Unless there are weird outliers I suppose. But is there is something peculiar about a given scientist's publications that skews one particular measure of awesomeness....wouldn't someone being presented that measure discount accordingly?
Like if a h-index was boosted by a host of middle author contributions to a much more highly cited domain than the one most people associate you with? That sort of thing.