Quite possibly. Or, much like the US list I referenced with "oh, there was a Winter Olympics this year, we should name some Winter Olympians' rather than looking at who was actually the best Winter Olympian that year, they've probably gone with something like "oh crap, we need to get some baseball players in here. Who are big names? looks up home run records Barry Bonds and Alex Rodríguez? Cool, put 'em in somewhere". I don't dispute your statement that if we include the two of them we should include Lance, I agree with you there. The other alternative is that their frame of references is obsolete (much like the biathlon I mentioned, where Bjørndalen was included over Svendsen who had been better than him all year, more because of what Bjørndalen had achieved 8 years prior when the Games were in the US than what he had done in 2010) and there was more attention paid to baseball in the 2000s than in recent years since Trout has been around.
I would also contest that while your statements "baseball is an Olympic sport" and "[baseball is] watched more than swimming" are both correct, at the same time as an Olympic sport swimming is almost certainly watched more, and also Olympic medals are a currency which has a lot greater translatability to an audience that doesn't understand a sport which elevates the achievements of people like Phelps and Thorpe due to the glut of medals available in swimming. I remember at some point a video was shared on here of Michael Johnson doing punditry for the BBC and them gushing over Phelps' achievements and expecting Johnson to get very patriotic and proud of it, and Johnson was just completely unimpressed, saying something along the lines of "if they had 200 and 400m running, 200 and 400m skipping, 200 and 400m running backwards, and 200 and 400m running while waving your arms around, I could have won eight gold medals". But there's no way that "he has the most Olympic gold medals of anybody in history" doesn't have more currency with the man in the street than any baseball achievement, not to mention the barrage of fancy stats like xWAR that are second nature to somebody raised on the sport, but a disorienting fog to the novice fan.
Even so, a lot of minority sports only get attention paid to them for events on the scale of the Olympics. And there, the problem that baseball has is that it's an Olympic sport, but it's not really an Olympic sport. Much like (road) cycling, tennis or soccer-football, it pays Olympic medals, but unlike for things like athletics, swimming, track cycling, rowing, wrestling etc., the Olympics aren't the biggest achievement in the sport. Lots of people will tune in to see these sports once every four years, and that's only because it's the Olympics - but they'll then remember those performances and not the ongoing performance in the sport.