No, the best wins people talk about with regard to Hagler were also over small guys. Hearns and Duran to name two.
Watch Hopkins throw down and stomp the Puerto Rican flag in the middle of a jam packed Puerto Rican stadium before you pick Hagler too quickly... Close fight, edge Hagler...
Jesus Christ! :-( What the hell is wrong with some of the posters here? Even at 44 years old, when was Hopkins hurt or someone even came close to "killing" him. Hopkins is crafty, dirty, and has terrific defense. It would be a very close and ugly fight that Hagler has a higher chance of winning.
Both Hagler and Hopkins were(are) great fighters with an array of physical tools that almost make me want to say they'd need 2 or 3 fights to decide which one was the better middleweight. That being said, I firmly believe the one advantage that Bernard Hopkins holds over Marvin Hagler is the ability to never get drawn into another fighters fight. Hagler on numerous occasions tried to beat fighters at "their" game. He tried to outbox Sugar Ray Leonard to no avail, he went to war with both Hearns and Mugabi when a tactical fight would have probably better suited him in the long run(as far as punishment is concerned), he tried to be slick vs. Duran and that almost failed him in a huge way. Hopkins never, ever bent to an opponents will. He always has a plan B and always seems to make his opponent uncomfortable in the ring. RJJ had his hands full with a very green B-Hop, Calzaghe looked like an amateur, Tito and Pavlik chased and chased and were cut down to size. Hopkins has controlled every fight he has ever been in with his fighting I.Q., I can't say the same for Hagler. IMO Hopkins is the much smarter fighter and would find a way to beat Hagler in a very ugly, yet skillful bout between 2 legends of the middleweight division. Hopkins 116-112, and Hagler thinks he got robbed.