I'm still convinced that my old suggestion of a "player roles" Scouting Trip should be implemented. The idea is this:
There are 12 possible categories of responses to a scouting trip. Each trip now gets you 4 - presumably randomly selected by even weight. At, say, a 25% cost increase over a regular scouting trip (with no greater award of recruiting effort), you would select one of your own designated player roles in a new Player Roles Scouting Trip using a drop-down menu within the recruiting tab (using the same layout as the old booster gift arrangement). Your settings in the selected player role would be used to determine the likelihood of getting a response in each particular category. There would only need to be a minimum percentage likelihood of, say, 5% for each category as a floor.
As an example, if you create a PG player role that puts 25% into each SPD, PER, BH, & P, then all the other 8 categories would get a 5% likelihood and those 4 categories would get a 15% likelihood of a response. Since this behaves as a weighted combination, the odds of receiving a response in the more heavily weighted categories is much better than 15%. As another example, a defined C role could have 100% REB. That would provide odds of 45% REB & 5% in the other 11 categories. That would not quite assure a response to REB in the scouting trip, but it would be awfully close.
This would provide a clear purpose for the player roles tool and would improve the results for those actually trying to use scouting trips to select recruits (rather than for the recruiting effort itself). Since this randomization is done already, I don't expect that it would be so burdensome on server capacity, but I'm not a programmer.