What a great fight this would have been the clash of styles. I got Pea by UD. His jab and defense would give even a offensive whirlwind like Pryor fits. Pea was simply the more complete fighter.
there is no way sweat pea should be ahead on that list, whitaker was at his best at 135, pryor was unbeatable at 140, noone wanted to fight him. i'll sum it up for you Sweat Pea ruled 135 Pryor ruled 140 Pryor gets a clear ud against sweat pea in a fight at 140.
Who did Pryor beat to prove he was unbeatable at 140? Who did he ever even face with a similar style to Whitaker? How proven was he, really? Obviously a fantastic fighter at his best, but still unproven on some levels. The same is not the case with Whitaker, though he admittedly never faced anything quite like Pryor either. And you're acting as if there was some big drop-off between Pea's abilities at 135 and 140, which clearly wasn't the case aside from maybe lateral movement and a bit of his quickness/athleticism, but then he proved all the way up to 154 that he was more than capable of fighting consistently on the move when needed, so I don't think that would be much of an issue. He showed technical skills as good as ever in his fights with Brazier and Pineda at 140.
Throughout his prime I believe that Pryor was the the best 140lbs fighter that ever lived, he was aquard, quick, powerful and he never stopped throwing punches. Now whitaker was an outstanding fighter, the best of fighter of this generation, great reflexes and speed, i just believe that he wouldn't be able to handle pryor's relentless style. you say that pryor has no names on his record, and i agree with you, for a fighter of his abilities he should have had a better resume. his best win is against an old but still very good and dangerous alexis arguello. but i believe noone wanted to fight him, leonard wanted no part of him, he rejected the fight after beating tommy hearns, who pryor beat as an amateur, leonard instead decided to fight a bum and retire.
You are badly misinformed. First of all, Leonard didn't duck him, he just had much bigger fights on the horizon. Fighting an unproven 140 pounder who was the underdog against a faded Arguello would have been useless with fights like Hearns, Duran, and Hagler on his mind. Neither Leonard nor the media at the time took the offer seriously. Also, Pryor called out Leonard prior to Leonard's meeting with Hearns, which was a much bigger prospective fight at the time. As for Hearns and Pryor, yes Pryor did beat him in the ams. A 21 year old Pryor beat a raw, 17 year old Hearns completely devoid of his main strengths, primarily his power. That fight tells absolutely nothing and those who reference it more or less just show a lack of knowledge of the situation. Hearns would've stopped Pryor early in the pros, and Leonard would've likely KO'd him as well. Pryor was no Welterweight. And Leonard retired due to a detached retine, which nowadays can be dealt with but at the time it was a very serious deal, one that severely effected his prospects of furthering his career.
after hearns there was no bigger fights on the horizen, rather than wasting time and fighting a bum he could have given pryor the shot he deserved. its like seeing floyd fight steve forbes rather than miguel cotto. pryor called out leonard before the hearns fight, but the offer was always on the table, if leonard called pryor and said that he wanted the fight after hearns then it would have happened. its clear that leonard wanted no part of pryor. i never knew that age of hearns when he fought pryor so thanks for the info. i'm not arguing that leonard had to take a break from boxing, and when leonard returned to the ring there was very little chance of him making 147, but the oppurtunity was there to give pryor his shot and leonard decided not to.