Apparently, 'We'll See' Means 'Questionable'

So Pierce goes down, gets carried off like a martyr, gets put in a wheelchair, runs back out. This much is indisputable, and we may never know the whole truth.

But over at FanHouse, Brett Edwards has moved onto a whole 'nother questionable bit of lore: Pierce's status for game two. "Questionable" according to the The Globe, and setting us up for even more heartwarming drama. Quoth Edwards:

The only thing that's used as supporting evidence for this ridiculous assertion is the following quote from Pierce, which, by the way, is the very last line of the post. Pierce's response to the question of whether or not he'll be ready for Game 2: '"We'll see," he said. "I mean, it's in pain. I was able to get through tonight. I don't know if it was off adrenaline or what, but got through it."'

That's it. "We'll see" all of a sudden means, "OMG! Pierce might not play in Game 2?!" Please.

I don't doubt that there's something wrong with Pierce, or think the media's not usually out to milk a story. And of course that goes up during the Finals, even if two dramatic Pierce comebacks might be laying it on a bit thick. But "questionable" is, like, an official term, or at very least one that indicates a strong doubt. "We'll see" isn't "I might not play," it's "I have no idea what's going on and am ending the sentence."

(Editor's note: Pierce said in today's news conference there's a "great chance" he'll play in Game 2.)

This post originally appeared on the Sporting Blog. For more, see The Sporting Blog Archives.