I've had all different draft budgets across my leagues so far, but 14s for draft is generally fine, it's my favorite level. I prefer going high for volume rather than for the accuracy, because I prefer the moneyball strategy of letting type-A and type-B guys all leave in free agency and I want to make the most of those extra picks. 20 scouting gives you literally every single player, and it also basically gives you pinpoint projections (based on 20 training) across every single attribute. Despite that, 20-20 scouting was a waste of 12 budget units as you will get the same quality of player at 14 as you do at 20, it's not like they give you special guys that nobody else sees.
14 will provide reasonable estimates of maybe 75% of the attributes but you'll notice for certain ones it leaves their projected at the same as their current and for others it drastically overprojects. So like it'll say a RF with 58 range current will finish with a 58 range projected, even though your training will boost him to something like 63-67 or whatever, and conversely it'll say a LH batter with 45 vsL current will get to 75 vsL projected. So that kind of stuff throws their overall ratings off and if you're ranking exclusively on projected overall (the default) then your list is inherently wrong.
I also just took over a team that had scouting budgets of 9 college and 0 HS, I only had I think 12 high school players total, and the scouting was so wild (like pitchers with current 0 range projected for 20 range, etc) that I had to rely entirely on current + age and formulate my own projections based on the patterns I'm familiar with. Not so good but I still did pretty well in that draft given the circumstances