I wish I had any. Unfortunately the waters have been muddied by fields like criminology, which are basically limited to a liberal analysis of the all-to-abstract individual, psychology, etc. Like of course things like crime, and justice are a reflection of class-struggle--so in analyzing things like gangs, especially in the period of history you referrence, this generally becomes subsumed into broader theoretical concerns.
To (try and) answer your questions what separates the BPP from something like the crips is, first of all, ideology (see Revolutionary Action Movement), which, through the struggle of some dedicated revolutionaries, precipitated into a line, and program, which responded to the conditions of its time.
What confounds us is how can something like the Crips--which as far as I know was started because some guy got mad at being beat up at the gym...--come to dominate a whole era after the demise of the BPP?
At this point I can only speculate: yes, from the broadest view point the gangs that came to define the 70s--90s were a counter-offensive against the Black nationalism of the 60s, and insofar as the Black national question is a (big) component of the proletarian class struggle in this country we could call it a counter-offensive of the ruling class. BUT, the question remains, was it a conscious effort by the state, or a secondary effect of the decline of the World Proletarian Revolution that was happening at the same time? Was it a strategy, or simply a tactic to nurture these violent, petty conflicts against these revolutionary organizations. Etc. the connection is there, but remains to be fully fleshed out.
Revolutionary consciousness isn't spontaneous! Empiricist, subjectivist, and cannot see the world beyond their own nose. Scientific socialism was brought to, and fused with, the workers' movement--a cursory reading of Lenin would tell you that. Y'all are backwards as fuck.
In terms of proper theory/practice I have some bad news and perhaps a suggestion for you. Unfortunately both revisionism and a broad anti-intellectual attituide are hegemonic today. From my experience theory, if it is even studied at all, is done in an ecltic, unfocused manner based purely off of personal interest rather than directed at understanding / strategizing about a particular problem--theory and practice are entirely separated.
PSL kind of indirectly enforces this by overemphasizing capital P Party (actually Procedural really) discipline among its members. With every comcievable task officially delegated, for instance, if there's an event a such-and-such person will be told they are responsible for bringing water, the other fliers, etc. Such explicit, granular control is fitting more of a boot-camp than a Communist Party in the sense that there is no way creative applications, or avant-garde developments can occur in such an environment. Not to mention the problem of dissent & censorship endemic among Trotskyite groups.
I'm being too detailed for what I want to get across in this comment. Although I don't necessarily agree with them 100% the Unity Prospectus by USU covers the lay of the land of the US left quite well:
I guess the advice I have for you is that while you should get involved in whatever is available, you should do so with a critical eye--never lose persoective on the ultimate goal of a Communist revolution; understand the difference between tactics-as-plan and tactics-as-process & don't get lost in the weeds. With that in mind, always strive to criticize incorrect ideas, no matter how unwelcome it may be; claim no false-unity either, divide what can be divided into two sides. Have a sense of separation and think of it as an investigation.
Cobalt is an amazing band! Missed opportunity to not use their (admittedly generic) logo though