Did Hopkins ruin Pascal forever?

Pascal looks like an amazing athlete, but that doesn't necessarily mean he was a great boxer. He was very muscular, so he's short for the light-heavyweight cl. Roy Jones was only 5'11", but Roy had incredible speed, reflexes, and footwork. Pascal is too muscle-bound. I can honestly say that while yes Michael Moorer wasn't the same after his loss to Foreman, he was already not the same as he was when he was fighting at light-heavy. He was a very dominant fighter at 175; better than Pascal. I'd say Moorer was probably more accomplished than either Pavlik or Pascal for that matter. I think it's a little odd to think that these 27 year old guys like Bradley and 29 yr old's like Pascal are green. Roberto Duran was 29 when he beat Ray Leonard in 1980, and he had more than 70 wins at that point, been the unified lightweight champ then he became welterweight champ. Ray retired for the 1st time at 26. I mean Marvin Hagler retired at 33 years old. If these guys aren't in their primes at 27-29 yrs old then something is wrong. One can get more popular in your 30's but even Hopkins isn't knpocking people out, and he's an extremely rare fighter to even be doing what he's doing. Ali should have never fought after his last fight with Frazier in 1975 and he was 33 then. A boxer's 20's is when they need to make the most of it. Not every boxer ages like Hopkins. Ray Leonard was done at 34; remember his brutal loss to Terry Norris?