Almost certainly lower than he deserved, as his reward for risk-taking. Your opening line there seems to support this.
High skill level, unprecedented ppv sales for non-hw, and can only be accused of "ducking " two fighters of his generation: Forrest and Wright. He fought just about everyone, but came up short in every one of his highest-profile and most dnagerous fights, barring one or two.
De La Hoya had a much better career than Starling, warts and all (and I don't think Starling had a bad career at all).
Although i happen to think that the fact that almost all his loses where close loses....(other then when he was shot against pac...and well outsized against hopkins) should also be counted for him...of course close only counts in horse shoes and hand grandades..still..i think a close fight means something.
There's no doubt he's an atg and can run with anyone at a given weight. His close losses on the biggest stages were contorversial, to put it mildly. I was just pointing out the arguments of the subject.