The layup masters
上籃高手
Is being good at the layup as simple as getting to the rim?
There’s rarely a distinction made between a player’s ability
to get in layup range versus his ability to actually sink it.
Perhaps that’s because “a layup” is also a metaphor for
something easy, like a “gimme” putt in golf.
熟練上籃和打進籃下一樣簡單嗎？分別球員能打進籃框旁的能力和真正
能把球放進籃框的能力是少見的。可能是因為「上籃」是簡單的代名詞
，就像是高爾夫的「gimme（譯按：休閒高爾夫球賽時，球離洞口不遠就
直接算進洞，不用再推了的球）」。
Whoever popularized the metaphor probably never tried to score
over NBA giants, I’d hazard.
我大膽假設宣傳這個說法的人可能沒有嘗試在NBA的巨人們前上籃得分。
The layup also gets no respect because it doesn’t demand respect.
Unlike the dunk, the layup fails to seize an arena’s attention
with a sudden lightning bolt at the hoop. Instead, it takes an
indirect route off the backboard before meandering along the rim,
waffling on whether to finally be a basket already.
上籃也不受到尊重，因為它不需要被尊重。不像雷霆萬鈞的灌籃般，上籃
無法抓住球場的注意力。反而是用個經過籃板的曲折路徑，在成為計分板
上的分數前還在籃框上逗留。
Incredible dunks look super intentional, as though a player’s
life depended on forcing the ball through the rim at that moment.
Incredible layups look accidental, as though a fouled Dwyane Wade
thought “Why not?” while flinging the ball in the backboard’s
general direction.
驚人的灌籃看起來是絕對蓄意的，如同球員在那一刻把生命都用在把球灌
進去般。而驚人的上籃看起來是充滿意外的，就像Dwyane Wade被犯規後往
籃板一拋時還想著「何不就唬爛一下？」。
So the layup commutes between “you’re open and should always
make it” and “you weren’t looking at the rim, that was total
luck.” It’s hard to get recognition for being good at something
when both the routine and the spectacular are so easily dismissed.
所以上籃介於「你有空檔應該投進」和「你壓根都沒看籃框，唬爛進的」。
當基本功夫和精彩表現兩者都輕易的被忽略時，是很難認定一個人是否真正
擅長於上籃。
Well, no one is dismissing the mighty layup in these parts. The
shortest bank shot is indeed a skill