Both were kings from 122 to 130. Barrera won the trilogy between them, but Morales was able to beat the 2 boxers that Barrera couldn't, that is Junior Jones and Manny Pacquiao.
Its a tough call. All the above have good points. I don't undervalue the Hamed win though. That goes a long way- but does that offset the wins Morales had that Barrera couldn't pull off? Ahhh I want to believe in Barrera! At the end of the day, its probably Morales. It would have been perfect had Morales fought Hamed...
At his best, I always thought Morales had more going for him. He had more of an air of invincibility about him than Barrera, though Barrera was his kryptonite.
Who had the better career? I think it's splitting hairs really. Barrera won the trilogy but I never thought that he was any better than Morales because of it. The fights were too close and competitive for that - kind of like Pacquiao v Marquez. Common opponents, Morales has the edge because he beat Jones and Pacquiao but Barrera's win over Hamed might have been the biggest win that either fighter had in their careers. Ultimately, they'll be forever linked and right next to each other in any Mexican all-time top 10 or all-time p4p lists.