To run the Dodgers. I question whether Alderson can succeed without most of his players taking steroids. Most of those good A's teams had Canseco, Tejada, Giambi... mulder, zito, hudson... Given Mulder and Zito's history, I'm not sure they're the best examples to refute my statement I don't understand what you're getting at. I think it's safe to assume a majority of baseball players in the early 2000s were juicing. Should we also question the merits of other executives who ran successful teams in this era? I think that certain teams (i.e. the Giants, A's, Rangers, Baltimore, etc.) seemed to be more heavily involved with steroids than other teams. For example, the only Cub I've read about taking steroids while on the team was Rondell White (actually I think there was one other in the Mitchell report), and I don't know of any White Sox players. Remember Dusty Baker's ability to "get the most" out of veterans? I think we now have the explanation for why that was. I'm not saying that Alderson isn't a good executive, but I do think it's worth questioning how much some of these executive's (and manager's) success was due to lax supervision compared to other teams.