I would not expect baseball to have the same level of doping sophistication that cycling has. Doping has a very different effect in baseball. It is indirect. In cycling someone can say if I increase my power by x Watts then I can take y seconds off this climb or knock z seconds off that time trial. It is a situation where people can experiment with products, measure the results, then adjust the product mix. That situation does not exist in baseball. Strength can be measured but that does not translate directly to baseball results. Baseball players will be concerned not just with strength but an amorphous sense of well being and energy level. This will lead to a loosey-goosey,/fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants,/if-it-feels-good-then-it's-working type of doping, which will lead to those who are little more than suppliers or quacks using bro-science to decide what doping to use. They probably should have done their best to measure strength, sprint times, and aerobic capacity. But I can easily see players thinking of doping like, "I am bench pressing more than ever, I feel good, and I am getting great results on the field. It must be working." There is less use for a Dr. Ferrari-like character, especially since testing in baseball is almost non-existent.