Thoughts on this top 5 @ 160

Any thoughts on this top 5 at middleweight?
Undoubtedly others I've left out could deserve a top 5 place depending on different criteria.
Is there anybody I've missed out who you think is really better than these at 160 ? Good enough to displace any of them?
I won't go in to why these 5 make the list, they are just my top 5 currently (I think).
In no particular order.

Marvellous Marvin Hagler
Carlos Monzon
Harry Greb
Charley Burley
Roy Jones Jr

Here are some I've left out, and why.

Bob Fitzsimmons :
the era is so long ago, footage is grainy and there isn't much of it.
I'm mostly interested in boxing from about the 20's onwards. Is Bob kicking out any of the above?

Stanley Ketchel :
See above. And I'm not sure Stanley has quite the resume of the others, irrespective of era.
I don't know that much about him though, so if you think he should be rated any higher, please educate.

Bernard Hopkins :
I just don't rate him all that highly. I know some disagree.
His best wins were against fighters who did very little at 160.
He was spanked by Jones when Jones was prime, and maybe I'm being a bit harsh on old Bernard, but this detracts from his legacy as well.

Gennady Golovkin :
I'm a huge fan of GGG, but he didn't get to show what he could really do. The most avoided fighter of recent years. I think he would have fared well in any era being super durable, hard hitting, with good skills in his prime.
If he'd been born at the start of the century he might have been on the list, but as it is he's still an honourable mention.

Sugar Ray Robinson :
He's in the top ten for sure, but doesn't quite make top 5 for me. He still did brilliantly at 160, but he could be beaten by guys not on the list, so I think he gets beaten more often than not by the guys who are.

 

I guess. Just who do you think would win the most if they all fought each other a few times.

 

Cool. Fair enough.
I chose Jones because of how he looked at 160 even though he wasn't there long. He beat some very good fighters there and embarrased Hopkins, a Hopkins who most would say is a top ten middle. Hard to ignore.

 

I'll add that when I say I don't rate Hopkins, I mean I don't put him anywhere near top 5. I think he's top 20 which still makes it a great win for Jones, and I can't help considering what Jones did at super middle.

 

He got big acclaim for beating Trinidad and Oscar. Guys he'd have beaten whenever - he always loses to prime Roy.
When exactly was Hopkins prime? When he fought those welters, or when he lost to Taylor twice in a row?
Johnson? Maybe.
Shot to bits Simon Brown, or when he lost to Mercado?
He wasn't prime when he had some good wins in his 40's.
Jones lost to Hopkins because Jones was done, he was a different fighter by then. Hopkins was just Hopkins.