They're both welters compared to GGG who was the daddy of the division for a decade. And Leonard won but it was close enough that he gets plus points. As for the body of resume, they were both fighting at world level and dominating for a decade. Unless you think the 70s/80s division was greater than today it's pretty much a draw on that front
Uh, so you're saying that GGG isn't better than Hagler's 7th pro win, Manny Freitas with a record of 20-28-2? Or that GGG is worse than Hagler's 9th pro win, Bob Harrington with a record of 16-19-6? I know records don't necessarily mean everything but c'mon man, GGG is one of the best current fighters and you are saying he isn't better than ANYONE Hagler beat?
Wrong wording. I should proof read it. Hagler's resume is better than GGG, and the guys he fought were higher ranked than GGG. You can argue that Duran and Hearns and Leonard were not middleweights, but neither was Canelo.
In a fair fight Hagler would win convincingly. However Canelo has never been interested in fair fights and is the poster child for shallow fight fans.
Just looked at the first Golovkin-Canelo fight again to remind myself how it all played out and imo, GGG beat Canelo in their first fight, doing the better work in more rounds, no matter what the official fight result was. Marvelous Marvin would do an even better job. Canelo's a strong durable boxer, but Hagler in his prime would very likely be too quick (he was sharper and quicker than GGG) and too accurate in his southpaw style for Alvarez, he could box and brawl, unlike GGG would really go for it, had a good chin and could box the 15 rounds. Hagler clear UD.