ImageImageImageImageImage

Build-A-Label: 2.0 Discussion (Part 1)

Moderators: dakomish23, Capn'O, j4remi, Deeeez Knicks, NoLayupRule, GONYK, mpharris36, HerSports85, Jeff Van Gully

Greenie
RealGM
Posts: 58,966
And1: 30,697
Joined: Feb 25, 2010

Build-A-Label: 2.0 Discussion (Part 1) 

Post#1 » by Greenie » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:48 pm

1- Greenie (Commish)
2- Phish Tank (Commish)
3- 3toheadmelo (Commish)
4- Mecca
5- IllmaticHandler
6- spree8
7- Manhattan Project
8- Knicksfan20
9- Slicin n dicin
10- Fury
11- ctorres
12- Smash3
13- HEZI

Rules:

- 15 round snake draft

- Hip-Hop, Rap and R&B only. Of the 15 selections, 7 rappers, 3 singers, & 1 producer must be taken. You have 4 additional picks you can make and can choose any of the three.

-Groups are not allowed to be picked if any of the members of the group released a solo project. However, if a group has members that did not release a project, you are allowed to draft that group as a selection. The same applies to producer groups as well

-Most importantly, there's a 6 hour time limit between picks. If you are not able to make a pick, please PM Phish, Greenie, or Melo in advance. If the time limit passes, then your turn will be skipped.

- Clock stops between 12am and 8am. If you are in the clock starting at 9pm that means you have until 11am the following morning to make your pick.
User avatar
Phish Tank
RealGM
Posts: 19,406
And1: 12,334
Joined: Nov 09, 2004
Location: Your Timepiece
   

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#2 » by Phish Tank » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:49 pm

1.0?

At least call it 2.0 or 1.5 :lol:

Anyways, I'm down to co-commish
Image
IllmaticHandler
RealGM
Posts: 22,532
And1: 23,325
Joined: Jul 26, 2004

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#3 » by IllmaticHandler » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:51 pm

Damn Greens. :o


Image
Greenie
RealGM
Posts: 58,966
And1: 30,697
Joined: Feb 25, 2010

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#4 » by Greenie » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:51 pm

Phish Tank wrote:1.0?

At least call it 2.0 or 1.5 :lol:

Anyways, I'm down to co-commish

Nah, we ain't doing this like the current draft.


Need one more commish...you guys can overrule me if you like :lol:
User avatar
Phish Tank
RealGM
Posts: 19,406
And1: 12,334
Joined: Nov 09, 2004
Location: Your Timepiece
   

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#5 » by Phish Tank » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:52 pm

Greenie wrote:
Phish Tank wrote:1.0?

At least call it 2.0 or 1.5 :lol:

Anyways, I'm down to co-commish

Nah, we ain't doing this like the current draft.


Need one more commish...you guys can overrule me if you like :lol:


nah we'll get a consensus :lol:
Image
Greenie
RealGM
Posts: 58,966
And1: 30,697
Joined: Feb 25, 2010

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#6 » by Greenie » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:52 pm

IllmaticHandler wrote:Damn Greens. :o


Image

Go finish your draft. Use it as practice then bring your butt over here.
ezmoney707
General Manager
Posts: 7,959
And1: 2,701
Joined: Jun 21, 2006
     

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#7 » by ezmoney707 » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:53 pm

Well damn


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
Fury
RealGM
Posts: 22,831
And1: 14,934
Joined: Mar 07, 2007
       

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#8 » by Fury » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:53 pm

This is dumb
User avatar
3toheadmelo
RealGM
Posts: 83,902
And1: 118,976
Joined: Feb 15, 2015
 

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#9 » by 3toheadmelo » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:54 pm

i'll co commish
Image
It’s like when lil bitches make subliminal records, if it ain’t directed directly at me, I don’t respect it
Greenie
RealGM
Posts: 58,966
And1: 30,697
Joined: Feb 25, 2010

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#10 » by Greenie » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:54 pm

Fury wrote:This is dumb

Would you like to sign up?
Greenie
RealGM
Posts: 58,966
And1: 30,697
Joined: Feb 25, 2010

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#11 » by Greenie » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:56 pm

Alright.

So it's Phish, 3Melo and Greenie as Co-Commissioners.
User avatar
Fury
RealGM
Posts: 22,831
And1: 14,934
Joined: Mar 07, 2007
       

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#12 » by Fury » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:56 pm

Greenie wrote:
Fury wrote:This is dumb

Would you like to sign up?


Nah, got a good draft going right now
Greenie
RealGM
Posts: 58,966
And1: 30,697
Joined: Feb 25, 2010

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#13 » by Greenie » Sun Apr 30, 2017 11:58 pm

Fury wrote:
Greenie wrote:
Fury wrote:This is dumb

Would you like to sign up?


Nah, got a good draft going right now

We're starting when you're finished if you change your mind.
Greenie
RealGM
Posts: 58,966
And1: 30,697
Joined: Feb 25, 2010

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#14 » by Greenie » Mon May 1, 2017 12:01 am

Group rules?

Can we have them or no?
User avatar
El Poochio
Knicks Forum Jose Cuervo Man
Posts: 34,766
And1: 24,594
Joined: May 19, 2015
Location: Where The Wild Things Are
         

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#15 » by El Poochio » Mon May 1, 2017 12:02 am

Dibs on Wu-Tang since we can essentially draft bands from pick 1
Image

B: L. Doncic | J. Carter | D. Banton
B: D. Melton | A. Burks
B: B. Ingram | K. Oubre | J. Tate
B: Z. Williamson | DJJ | K. Lofton Jr
B: KP | D. Powell
User avatar
Phish Tank
RealGM
Posts: 19,406
And1: 12,334
Joined: Nov 09, 2004
Location: Your Timepiece
   

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#16 » by Phish Tank » Mon May 1, 2017 12:02 am

Brainstorming some ideas about groups (it'll be a bit disorganized, but you'll get it):

1) We should allow groups to be picked from the outset
2) Groups are all-or-nothing (including any producers)
3) However, groups should be separated into different tiers
4) For example, choosing Mobb Deep or Public Enemy or Roots is gonna be different than say a Wu-Tang or a Fugees
5) If you pick Wu-Tang, then you'd have to skip or give up your next two picks (or something along that nature)
6) Common sense should be taken with regards to groups. You can't pick Watch The Throne for example
7) Groups need to have a minimum album release requirement to be picked.
Image
Greenie
RealGM
Posts: 58,966
And1: 30,697
Joined: Feb 25, 2010

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#17 » by Greenie » Mon May 1, 2017 12:08 am

Phish Tank wrote:Brainstorming some ideas about groups (it'll be a bit disorganized, but you'll get it):

1) We should allow groups to be picked from the outset
2) Groups are all-or-nothing (including any producers)
3) However, groups should be separated into different tiers
4) For example, choosing Mobb Deep or Public Enemy or Roots is gonna be different than say a Wu-Tang or a Fugees
5) If you pick Wu-Tang, then you'd have to skip or give up your next two picks (or something along that nature)
6) Common sense should be taken with regards to groups. You can't pick Watch The Throne for example

I don't know.
Maybe we should "black list some groups".
Drafting groups from the jump sounds good to me. All or nothing sounds good to me as well.

Also, I don't mind allowing all groups into play to be quite honest. It adds a new layer. Wu Tang was nice but we can still build a label better. How good you music knowledge is, is the name of the game.
User avatar
3toheadmelo
RealGM
Posts: 83,902
And1: 118,976
Joined: Feb 15, 2015
 

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#18 » by 3toheadmelo » Mon May 1, 2017 12:10 am

ctorres wants in as a co-commish
is that cool phish?

he knows his stuff very well. i'd recommend it
Image
It’s like when lil bitches make subliminal records, if it ain’t directed directly at me, I don’t respect it
User avatar
Phish Tank
RealGM
Posts: 19,406
And1: 12,334
Joined: Nov 09, 2004
Location: Your Timepiece
   

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#19 » by Phish Tank » Mon May 1, 2017 12:10 am

Greenie wrote:
Phish Tank wrote:Brainstorming some ideas about groups (it'll be a bit disorganized, but you'll get it):

1) We should allow groups to be picked from the outset
2) Groups are all-or-nothing (including any producers)
3) However, groups should be separated into different tiers
4) For example, choosing Mobb Deep or Public Enemy or Roots is gonna be different than say a Wu-Tang or a Fugees
5) If you pick Wu-Tang, then you'd have to skip or give up your next two picks (or something along that nature)
6) Common sense should be taken with regards to groups. You can't pick Watch The Throne for example

I don't know.
Maybe we should "black list some groups".
Drafting groups from the jump sounds good to me. All or nothing sounds good to me as well.

Also, I don't mind allowing all groups into play to be quite honest. It adds a new layer. Wu Tang was nice but we can still build a label better. How good you music knowledge is, is the name of the game.


Agree with blacklisting (i.e. you can't pick Odd Future or Watch The Throne or Dungeon Family, etc.)

I think all groups is a good idea too. I just think to level out the playing field, if you choose a larger group, you should waive your pick. If you pick a Wu-Tang, you'd have like a 50 rapper advantage over everyone else :lol:
Image
Greenie
RealGM
Posts: 58,966
And1: 30,697
Joined: Feb 25, 2010

Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion) 

Post#20 » by Greenie » Mon May 1, 2017 12:11 am

3toheadmelo wrote:ctorres wants in as a co-commish
is that cool phish?

he knows his stuff very well. i'd recommend it

I will step down unless we get a 5th.

Need an odd number for voting purposes.

Return to New York Knicks