If it was set up like I suggested, affecting the projections of all players(signed or unsigned), it would be relevant.   There would still be 0m owners and there would be 20m owners.   And there would be owners who find a comfort zone somewhere in between. 

What the changes did was:
A) put an end to low scouting and drafting off currents(removal of currents on unsigned players)
B) make trading with 0 ADV more difficult(no development patterns)
C) remove our ability to know how other teams budget

Personally, A and C will force me to make changes to how I do HBD business.   B will not.   I just won't trade for young players who can't at least sit on a BL bench right now.   If WifS wants to make ADV relevant to all owners, they have work to do.

if they make adv impact currents, couldn't one keep low adv and then trade sign free agents off of ML stats, if I see a guy hits around .285 with around 34 hr for 4 seasons in a row, i dont care what his ratings say. he should hit somewhere around that regardless of what i now see as his current ratings.  really im just thinking out loud.

Truth is that the removal of development patterns and viewing budgets has made evaluating trades difficult for 0 ADVers.

Before, when someone was trading a BL player for a prospect, I'd check when said prospect was drafted(or signing bonus for IFA), budget used to acquire that prospect and the prospect's development.   Using that info, I could determine if the deal was somewhat balanced.    The only thing I have now is the draft position and current ratings.

Maybe don't get rid of it, but set it to a lower maximum dollar amount. For example, if the max adv were be $10 instead of $20, and $8-10 were as accurate as $16-20 is now, I bet more people would use adv.

Right now the biggest reason I don't use it isn't because it's worthless, but because I just can't justify taking a large amount of money from my other budgets. I'd need $14 or more in adv to get decent projections, and I would much rather spend that on prospects or training or payroll. But if I only needed $7 or $8 to get a decent projection, I wouldn't feel so bad about taking that much money away from something else.

Not a bad idea. People would still use 0 but it would only be a 10 mil gain rather than 20.

All of these, on this page, are good points.  They're all why I keep asking "what am I going to see?"

I'm going to need to see another owner, using moderate to high ADV, have demonstrated success with and because of it.  Show me that yeah, I need to get in on some of that, too.

Well, I can lie and say "I use 20m" now.    You're not going to know who's using mod/high ADV.

Another reason that ADV isn't valuable is that  it's real value comes only if you are an owner trading for prospects.

The people that are typically trading for prospects on a fairly regular basis are usually tanking and are not nearly as concerned about return value for their vet but rather only about clearing cap room for the big IFA signing.

Maybe a guy like gleeman who regularly pawns off his aging all-stars for prospects would benefit, but in general most owners aren't doing enough of this to make them feel it is necessary.

Perhaps when your team is on it's last legs and you came in 2nd place missing the playoffs for the first time in 6-8 seasons it would be smart to transition, but of course if you are 0, it'd take too long. That might be a reason to keep it closer to 10 than 0, but I am sure many owners will just continue to ignore it and go another route when it is time to retool their BL squad.

I really like these discussions and every one of them makes me like the update even more...

  If it controlled all potentials I would certainly use it but I also have no doubt I would 0 out one of the other 3 scouting budgets and probably make a second one in the 5-8 mil range.

  I don't think that's what they are going for from a game balance point of view.

  If it controlled all current that seems to be well it certainly becomes relevant but since people don't take the minors very seriously how the F do you evaluate talent at all so it seems like you must use 15-20 or use 0.

  Again not very good from a game balance point of view.

  Making it 0-10 seems to be the best so far from a game balance point of view because you give 0 users less of an advantage and open it up to more people using it.

  Oh and getting rid of it doesn't work at all. Who the F thought of that ****.

Also I like what was done so far. Now the choices you make have consequences.

Run low IFA and you can't just go by player demands. If you budget 5 mil and sign a guy you are taking a chance maybe you get lucky maybe you get crap.
 
Run 20/0 in amateur scouting and you get exactly what you pay for 1 set of great numbers and one set of crap numbers.

What will be interesting is I think you can make cases for running just about any set of numbers in those 3 categories

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/29/2015 10:14:00 AM (view original):
Well, I can lie and say "I use 20m" now.    You're not going to know who's using mod/high ADV.

Well, dang.  Back to square one.

Almost everyone zeroes out at least 1 of the HS/College/IFA budgets.     That may change if we see some really good players getting taken in the 2nd/3rd rounds but, as it stands, top level talent is gone by the 2nd round.   Spending 16-20m each in College/HS is a poor use of resources.   And, with the way IFA bonuses are done, a lot of people aren't getting in that market.   Several of those with high IFA are zeroed out in both HS/College because they're using all bonus money on that one big IFA. 

IMO, it's perfectly reasonable to sit out one, if not two, of those aspects of the game. 

I don't think I ever said it isn't reasonable. I said that now there are real consequences to doing it. Except for advanced where I think most of us see no reason to move from 0

You have given examples of how 0 in Col/HS had little to no effect before this update.

IFA was a little different but you could still run 5-8 and hope to get just a little lucky because you didn't need accurate projections. If a guy asked for 3 mil or more you knew he was good.