Should Jim Jackson be signed?
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Should Jim Jackson be signed?
Yes
77%
 77%  [ 42 ]
No
9%
 9%  [ 5 ]
sjkldfs;fs0f4jr94prwfd
12%
 12%  [ 7 ]
Total Votes : 54

Author Message
kells1220
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 561
Location: Maryland

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:36 pm    Post subject:

Heck yes. What are our other options?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Phil
Retired


Joined: 03 Aug 2001
Posts: 10007

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 12:47 pm    Post subject:

I voted yes, but they coud sign Penny too.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakersdynasty999
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 06 Sep 2005
Posts: 1893

PostPosted: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:07 pm    Post subject:

uberzev wrote:
Point a Minute wrote:
If not JJ...then who else is out there not named Spreewell
The D-League must have some decent players.


tierre brown?
_________________
Lakers in '08.
WWW.AVERYTICKETS.COM
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB