Well, I'd say the Fuentes link is pretty strong.
As wild cards, yes, but they kept being invited, because they were a good team, not some sort of poor team with no resources.
Pantani wasn't high tech doped from the very beginning, unless you ignore his brilliant amateur career from before EPO was available to more than a few pioneers. So yes, I suppose you could compare him to Contador, in that both showed to be huge talents early on. Unlike Froome.
Contador is a doper, and a huge liar, but think of how he was caught: his positive was covered up, then leaked by the lab, and it involved a tiny amount of clen that most labs wouldn't have picked up. In other words, had he been 1% luckier we wouldn't have heard anything. At the same time, many notorious dopers never tested positive. The barrier between testing positive and never testing positive is not as significant as you make it out to be.