Build-A-Label: 2.0 Discussion (Part 1)
Moderators: dakomish23, Capn'O, j4remi, Deeeez Knicks, NoLayupRule, GONYK, mpharris36, HerSports85, Jeff Van Gully
Build-A-Label: 2.0 Discussion (Part 1)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 58,966
- And1: 30,697
- Joined: Feb 25, 2010
Build-A-Label: 2.0 Discussion (Part 1)
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.
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.
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
- Phish Tank
- RealGM
- Posts: 19,410
- And1: 12,340
- Joined: Nov 09, 2004
- Location: Your Timepiece
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
1.0?
At least call it 2.0 or 1.5
Anyways, I'm down to co-commish
At least call it 2.0 or 1.5
Anyways, I'm down to co-commish
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 22,532
- And1: 23,325
- Joined: Jul 26, 2004
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 58,966
- And1: 30,697
- Joined: Feb 25, 2010
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
Phish Tank wrote:1.0?
At least call it 2.0 or 1.5
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
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
- Phish Tank
- RealGM
- Posts: 19,410
- And1: 12,340
- Joined: Nov 09, 2004
- Location: Your Timepiece
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
Greenie wrote:Phish Tank wrote:1.0?
At least call it 2.0 or 1.5
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
nah we'll get a consensus
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 58,966
- And1: 30,697
- Joined: Feb 25, 2010
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
IllmaticHandler wrote:Damn Greens.
Go finish your draft. Use it as practice then bring your butt over here.
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
-
- General Manager
- Posts: 7,970
- And1: 2,726
- Joined: Jun 21, 2006
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
Well damn
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
- Fury
- RealGM
- Posts: 22,852
- And1: 14,977
- Joined: Mar 07, 2007
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
- 3toheadmelo
- RealGM
- Posts: 84,053
- And1: 119,374
- Joined: Feb 15, 2015
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
i'll co commish
It’s like when lil bitches make subliminal records, if it ain’t directed directly at me, I don’t respect it
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 58,966
- And1: 30,697
- Joined: Feb 25, 2010
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
Fury wrote:This is dumb
Would you like to sign up?
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 58,966
- And1: 30,697
- Joined: Feb 25, 2010
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
Alright.
So it's Phish, 3Melo and Greenie as Co-Commissioners.
So it's Phish, 3Melo and Greenie as Co-Commissioners.
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
- Fury
- RealGM
- Posts: 22,852
- And1: 14,977
- Joined: Mar 07, 2007
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
Greenie wrote:Fury wrote:This is dumb
Would you like to sign up?
Nah, got a good draft going right now
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 58,966
- And1: 30,697
- Joined: Feb 25, 2010
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
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.
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 58,966
- And1: 30,697
- Joined: Feb 25, 2010
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
Group rules?
Can we have them or no?
Can we have them or no?
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
- El Poochio
- Knicks Forum Jose Cuervo Man
- Posts: 34,770
- And1: 24,599
- Joined: May 19, 2015
- Location: Where The Wild Things Are
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
Dibs on Wu-Tang since we can essentially draft bands from pick 1
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
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
- Phish Tank
- RealGM
- Posts: 19,410
- And1: 12,340
- Joined: Nov 09, 2004
- Location: Your Timepiece
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
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.
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.
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 58,966
- And1: 30,697
- Joined: Feb 25, 2010
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
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.
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
- 3toheadmelo
- RealGM
- Posts: 84,053
- And1: 119,374
- Joined: Feb 15, 2015
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
ctorres wants in as a co-commish
is that cool phish?
he knows his stuff very well. i'd recommend it
is that cool phish?
he knows his stuff very well. i'd recommend it
It’s like when lil bitches make subliminal records, if it ain’t directed directly at me, I don’t respect it
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
- Phish Tank
- RealGM
- Posts: 19,410
- And1: 12,340
- Joined: Nov 09, 2004
- Location: Your Timepiece
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
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
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 58,966
- And1: 30,697
- Joined: Feb 25, 2010
Re: Build-A-Label: 1.0(Signups, Rules and Discussion)
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.