Alright. Sounds strange, and we'll hammer out rules later. But I want to see how much (if any? I imagine there will be alot) interest in a Hollywood draft we have. The basic idea is we'll have to fit some "positions," (we can brainstorm and think about these) and I think the idea will be as if we owned a movie company way back when actors/actresses were not permitted to work outside of their own movie company... So you want versatility, career depth, and of course, stellar performances. Homer picks are strongly encouraged.

I'm thinking a standard draft (not reverse snake) since there is less magnitude among the top picks, probably ~8 rounds (we'll flesh out the categories and decide rounds based on this) and there is no cutoff for age/era. (Although silent actors are not too versatile, obviously!)

So, don't just type "in," but rather mention some possible rules you'd like to see, or if people suggest some ahead of you, echo their thoughts (or debunk them). So, I'm IN.

Signups thus far:
BobboFitos

Edit: Draft wont start until Jan 2nd (so after holiday/new years) so plenty of time for signups. I'm thinking standard 24hr "shot clock" as well.

In, how about 10 rounds with

Director
Writer
Lead Actor
Lead Actress
Supporting Actor 1
Supporting Actor 2
Supporting Actress 1
Supporting Actress 2
Bench
Bench

This is ridiculous, I'm in. Time to start mining imdb. Although I have no idea how to do this, I like TheUntouchable's ideas above, but how do you define Supporting Actor vs Lead Actor? I assume it would sort of be like drafting nickel backs in the NFL draft where you just take a starting CB and make him your third CB, but then I'm not sure why the distinction between the two. I assume bench would be sort of a flex type position so if I wanted to take a writing team for example I would be able to do that or load up on a group of actors.

Epip better enter this because I think this has the most potential for spawning ridiculous arguments since there are few if any metrics to agree upon. Which btw, what are we going for, critical success or pure cash money, the two are not often the same.

I was thinking more along lines of "villain," "funnyman," "romantic lead," so you various actors/actresses increase (or decrease) value based on their relative advantage within that position. I'm also AGAINST drafting a director, similar to the NBA draft the whole player-coach thing would've been a positive.

IE. Clint Eastwood should go very high in this; if we're getting directors, his stock could rise because he fills 2 shoes very well. But I'd rather just take him for his acting.
Further, a guy like Adam Sandler would be a very low round pick - if at all - in your format, but if you're drafting a position for "funnyman" (or any other verbage) his stock rises to the point I could see him going midrounds.

Glad you're in, we need you for the google docs. obv

Going to lunch, but it seems that (in so far)

BobboFitos
TheUntouchable
Dudd

In.

And might I suggest changing the "supporting actor 1 and 2" to "Eye Candy" and "Character" supoorting actors?

Also, is this the right forum for this? SE does have a strong tradition of hypothetical drafts, but perhaps EDF or OOT would be more appropriate? Oh, and Samjjones needs to be pmed, stat.

I'm in, but I really want directors to be drafted just so someone pairs Michael Bay with Daniel Day-Lewis. An age cutoff would be nice also so we don't have people arguing the merits of Humphrey Bogart versus modern leads. That **** would be never ending.

Also reverse snake, come on now.

OOT is awful and EDF makes me feel like more of a redneck that I actually am. I'd vote to keep it here, and I'm in ^_^

wow some of you have some time on your hands lol

Not understanding why this is in Sporting Events, but I'm in regardless.

I am very much in favor of drafting a director, they are much more identifiable with their movies than coaches are with their teams. Michael Bay with DDL is a great example of the hilarity that could ensue.

Very true, but as a poker forum with tons of poker pros, its about what I'd expect. Being a poker pro means....


Flexible hours and schedule

Putting in 4 or 5 hours of 12+ tabling is more than enough work for one day, which leaves 19 or 20 other hours during the day for whatever you want

Money is not really a huge concern as long as you play within your bankroll and have a decent winrate




So while 99% of the world is working during the daytime hours each day, what else do we have to do?

I can't post in OOT btw, so I'll have to be out if we do it there. Maybe do it in the Lounge...they're pretty relaxed there, and this sort of thing seems right up their alley.