The Others: Who We Lose When the Cracks Swallow Our Children

by Delgreco Wilson, M.A.

First in a series on youth falling through the cracks.

CAMDEN, NJ – For more than three decades, I have worked on the front lines of America’s urban communities, walking alongside hundreds of young people as they navigated the treacherous passage from adolescence to adulthood. It has been the privilege of my life. I have watched young men and women from the toughest blocks of Philadelphia, Chester, Baltimore, and Camden ascend to heights that the statistics said they never would. They have become lawyers arguing before federal judges, police officers patrolling the very streets they grew up on, and teachers returning to classrooms they once felt invisible in. They have become doctors, nurses, plumbers, auto mechanics, postal workers, and sanitation workers. They have launched businesses as entrepreneurs, negotiated multi-million-dollar deals as sports agents, and taught the next generation as college professors. I have cheered from the sidelines as they stepped onto NBA courts, into WNBA arenas, and onto NFL fields, and I have watched them rise into NBA front offices with the power to reshape an industry. Their stories are testaments to resilience, to the transformative power of intervention, and to the undeniable potential that lies within every child, regardless of zip code.

But this essay is not about them.

This essay is about the others. The young boys and girls who are falling through the cracks, becoming entangled in the criminal justice system while still in middle and high school. These are the youth I could not reach, the ones who haunt my quiet moments. They are the 14-year-old facing an armed robbery charge in Camden, the 16-year-old in West Baltimore awaiting trial for a shooting he committed out of fear, the 15-year-old girl in North Philadelphia whose childhood was stolen long before she picked up her first weapon. For too long, our public policy discussions have oscillated between two poles: celebrating the exceptional success stories or condemning the failures as irredeemable. What we have lacked is analytical attention—rigorous, unflinching, and compassionate—focused on the complex machinery that produces these tragic outcomes. This essay, the first in a series, aims to spark that renewed public policy discussion. It is an attempt to map the unforgiving architecture that shapes the lives of these young people, so that we might finally muster the collective will to tear it down.

In the hollowed-out blocks of North Philadelphia, along the tense corridors of West Baltimore, and amid the post-industrial stillness of Camden, a grim arithmetic governs the futures of too many Black and Brown teenagers. We have grown accustomed to framing their encounters with the justice system as moral failings—a deficit of character or a collapse of cultural values. But this framing is not merely incomplete; it is a form of societal evasion. To truly understand why a 15-year-old picks up a gun or robs a corner store, we must look not at the mythology of the “super-predator,” a toxic phrase rightly relegated to the dustbin, but at a convergence of distinct, crushing forces that operate with the precision of a vice. Research confirms what these neighborhoods scream in silence: risk factors for delinquency rarely act in isolation. They compound, layer upon layer, until a young person’s likelihood of engaging in antisocial or criminal behavior becomes not an aberration but a statistical probability.

The Internal Storm

The first pressure point resides within the adolescent’s own neurological and psychological landscape, often before they are old enough to articulate their pain. In under-resourced urban clinics, impulsive behavior is rarely just a phase; it is frequently an undiagnosed and untreated condition like ADHD burning through a child’s capacity for self-regulation. When a boy in Camden acts on a thrill-seeking impulse without calculating the consequence—a retaliatory shooting, a sudden theft—we are often witnessing the collision of biology and environment. This cognitive short-circuit is compounded by academic alienation. A teenager reading three grade levels behind in a Baltimore City Public School does not simply have a “learning gap”; he experiences a daily, soul-crushing humiliation. The classroom, which should be a sanctuary, becomes a theater of failure. In response, the psyche constructs a hard shell of antisocial logic and emotional numbness. Empathy becomes a luxury that a drowning boy cannot afford; it is a muscle that atrophies when survival mode is perpetually activated. These individual deficits do not exist in a vacuum—they are the kindling that family chaos, peer pressure, and neighborhood violence are all too ready to ignite.

The Fractured Sanctuary

The individual psyche is shaped first in the crucible of the home. For many of these children, the door to their apartment or row house does not close on a refuge but on a secondary site of chaos. The domain of family dynamics is frequently the most significant predictor of future delinquency, and it is here that the cycle of trauma turns most ruthlessly. The issue is rarely a lack of love, but a corrosion of consistency. A mother stretched to breaking point by poverty may oscillate between harsh, explosive discipline and neglectful absence, leaving a child with no internal map of stable boundaries. Worse still is the terror of witnessing domestic violence or suffering direct abuse—experiences that drench the developing brain in stress hormones, forging a hyper-vigilant, aggressive response pattern that neurologically mirrors combat trauma. When criminality or substance abuse is the ambient background noise of a household, the unspeakable happens: the abnormal becomes normal. The fence separates from the family business, and the moral barrier between the living room and the street evaporates. A child emerging from such a home does not enter the world neutral; they enter it primed for the gravitational pull of the street.

The Gravity of Belonging

Once the foundation of family is fractured, the search for identity and protection becomes an urgent, life-or-death project. Adolescence is a desperate hunt for belonging, a hunt that does not pause for poverty. In environments where the legitimate markers of success—a diploma, a career, stability—feel like mirages, the street hierarchy fills the void with immediate, visceral rewards. Deviant peer association is not just negative influence; it is a survival strategy. For a young man in Philadelphia watching his peers gain money, respect, and safety through crew affiliation, the statistical risk of joining them seems an abstract problem compared to the immediate danger of standing alone. Gangs serve as the most ruthless and efficient merchants of identity, offering the unconditional protection of a brotherhood in exchange for the soul. They provide a devastatingly complete psychological package: a name, a uniform, an economic function, and an enemy to define oneself against. It is within this crucible of peer loyalty and violent rivalry that a particular art form has emerged, one that both documents this world and, critics argue, deepens its hold.

The Soundtrack of the Streets

This brings us to one of the most contentious dimensions of the conversation: the role of drill rap. Born in the tough neighborhoods of Chicago and echoing powerfully through the streets of New York, London, and beyond, drill music is a subgenre characterized by aggressive, trap-style beats and unflinching lyrics that chronicle street life with documentary precision. To its defenders, drill is a raw, creative outlet—a modern-day reporting from the front lines of America’s abandoned zip codes. The artists are not inventing the violence; they are holding up a bloodied mirror to the socio-economic realities and systemic neglect that already consume their communities. Yet, to its critics and to law enforcement agencies across the country, drill is not merely a chronicle. It is a provocation. The genre has become a legal and cultural battleground, and understanding its role demands that we hold two contradictory truths in tension: drill rap does not cause the conditions of juvenile delinquency, but it has become deeply entangled with the proliferation of delinquent behavior in ways that demand honest scrutiny.

The entanglement begins with what researchers call the “causal claim” debate. Police departments and prosecutors, from Chicago to Baltimore, argue that drill music actively glorifies, promotes, and even incites retaliatory gang violence. They point to the phenomenon of “diss tracks,” where artists taunt deceased rivals with gruesome specificity, sparking cycles of real-world retribution. This has led to the deeply controversial tactic of “putting lyrics on trial,” where a defendant’s drill lyrics, music videos, and social media presence are presented to juries as confessional evidence of gang membership or involvement in violent crimes. A teenager’s artistic persona, crafted for clout and algorithmic virality, suddenly becomes Exhibit A in a criminal proceeding, blurring the line between performance and reality in ways that many legal scholars find deeply prejudicial. The result is an intensified policing apparatus that monitors drill artists, removes YouTube videos en masse, and issues court orders banning young men from making certain music or associating with specific individuals. The art is treated as the crime itself.

But does the music cause the violence, or does the violence cause the music? The evidence leans heavily toward the latter. The socio-economic variables we have already laid out—neighborhood disadvantage, family trauma, academic failure, gang involvement—are the fuel. Drill rap is the engine that converts that fuel into a highly visible, often monetized cultural product. It chronicles the reality; it does not invent it. However, to dismiss the music as merely a neutral mirror is to ignore a more uncomfortable dynamic. Drill rap glorifies an anti-establishment, “glorious outlaw” identity, one that actively challenges traditional penal systems and rewards posturing. In a world where a young man feels invisible, the viral success of a drill video offers a potent, intoxicating currency: fame, fear, and respect. The algorithm does not reward nuance; it rewards the most incendiary, nihilistic content. This creates a feedback loop. A teenager who might have only lived on the periphery of gang life finds that adopting its most lethal postures online brings him the validation he has been starved of everywhere else. The art form, then, does not initiate the delinquency, but it can accelerate and entrench it, turning neighborhood conflicts into performative spectacles that demand real-world escalation to maintain credibility. The music becomes both a lifeline of expression and a tether to a violent identity from which it becomes increasingly difficult to escape.

The Suffocating Environment

Encasing all these layers—the psychological deficits, the family fractures, the peer gravity, and the cultural soundtrack—is the suffocating weight of environmental and economic despair. The zip codes of Camden, West Baltimore or Kensington in Philadelphia are not just backdrops; they are active, aggressive participants in the production of crime. Concentrated neighborhood disadvantage creates what criminologists call a “criminogenic environment”—a landscape where abandoned factories and boarded-up homes broadcast a message of societal abandonment louder than any sermon or textbook. When legitimate opportunity structures collapse, illicit economies don’t just emerge; they become the only rational industry. The concept of “routine activity” explains the terrifying randomness of this trap: when you concentrate thousands of unsupervised, disconnected youth into spaces with no youth centers, no functioning pools, no library hours, and no guardianship, criminal opportunities do not need to be sought out. They occur on the corner, at the bus stop, in the stairwell. The crime is not always born of malice, but of sheer proximity to a vacuum. It is from this vacuum that the most unflinching drill lyrics emerge, because the artists are simply describing what surrounds them every single day.

The Compound Effect

Here, then, is the essential truth: none of these variables acts alone. An impulsive, traumatized child does not inevitably become delinquent. An impulsive, traumatized child who is failing in school, whose parent is incarcerated, whose only source of protection is a neighborhood gang, and who finds his only voice in a drill rap scene that rewards hyper-violent posturing—that child is not a statistical anomaly. He is the predictable product of a compounding equation. The Department of Justice’s research on the causes and correlates of delinquency confirms that risk factors multiply rather than simply add up. Each layer of disadvantage magnifies the impact of the others, creating a downward spiral that individual willpower alone cannot reverse. This understanding exposes the folly of our current punitive responses. We cannot incarcerate our way out of ADHD, nor can a police officer solve the crisis of a child who has never known a stable adult. We cannot silence our way out of a cultural movement born of systemic pain. The young Black and Latino men navigating these unforgiving streets—and soundtracking their lives with the unflinching verses of drill—are not alien life forms; they are mirrors reflecting an architecture of neglect we have all agreed to sustain. The music is a symptom, an amplifier, and a cry for help all at once. Until we tear down that architecture, brick by hardened brick, the cycle will not break, because the math of cause and correlation will remain ruthlessly intact.

Black Athletes, the Agony and the Duty of the NAACP’s SEC Boycott

The NAACP Has Issued a Call for Black Athletes to Boycott the SEC. Asking a Young Prospect to Turn Down Dawn Staley Feels Insane. That Is the Measure of the Crisis.

PHILADELPHIA, PA – The NAACP, the nation’s oldest and most venerated civil rights organization, has now made it official. On Tuesday, it launched the “Out of Bounds” campaign, a direct and unambiguous call for Black athletes, their families, alumni, and fans to “withhold athletic and financial support” from major public universities in states that “have moved to limit, weaken or erase Black voting representation.” The target is clear: the powerhouse athletic programs of the Southeastern Conference (SEC) and their counterparts across the former Confederacy. The logic is searing. If the white political structures of these states have declared war on the franchise that Black Americans bled and died to secure, then the Black labor and Black fandom that sustain those states’ most cherished cultural and economic institutions must be redeployed as a weapon of collective self-defense. This is not a request for a symbolic gesture. It is a call to economic warfare, and it demands a sacrifice so profound that to state it plainly is to feel its weight in the pit of your stomach.

That sacrifice is measured most acutely not in dollars forfeited or championships deferred, but in a single, almost unthinkable question that will now confront Black families around dinner tables from Philadelphia to Houston: Should a gifted young Black woman pass on the opportunity to play for Dawn Staley?

To ask the question is to stand at the edge of a moral chasm. Dawn Staley is not merely a basketball coach. She is the living embodiment of a lineage that has produced the most towering figures in Black athletic leadership. She emerged from the Raymond Rosen Housing Projects in North Philadelphia, navigated every obstacle a society could place in her path, and ascended to the absolute pinnacle of her sport. At the University of South Carolina, she has built a dynasty with a dignity, grace, and unapologetic Black pride that was previously unimaginable. She has filled the enormous shoes of John Thompson, the Georgetown patriarch who showed that a Black coach could win with an all-Black starting five while demanding his players graduate. She carries the torch of John Chaney, the Temple legend who spoke truth to power in a gravelly baritone that made white administrators tremble. She extends the legacy of Nolan Richardson, who brought his “40 Minutes of Hell” to Arkansas and dared to say publicly that the SEC operated on a plantation model. In the 2025-26 season, Staley was one of five Black women head coaches in the SEC, a sisterhood that includes Yolett McPhee-McCuin at Ole Miss, Nikki Jones at Kentucky, Joni Taylor at Texas A&M, and the newly appointed Pauline Love at Alabama. These women are not tokens. They are the very best the Black community has produced—shining stars, guiding lights, proof that excellence and integrity can penetrate even the most historically hostile institutions.

To ask a young Black woman to forgo the chance to be molded by Dawn Staley is, on its face, an insane request. It is tantamount to asking a young Patrick Ewing to pass on John Thompson. It is asking Marc Macon to turn his back on John Chaney. It is asking a family to reject not just a coach but a cultural mother, a role model whose very existence is a rebuke to the white supremacy that still suffocates so many corners of American life. The NAACP, prominent Black activists, and the architects of “Out of Bounds” are standing before the Black community and saying, in effect: Target the best we have ever produced. Boycott Staley’s Gamecocks. Withdraw from the institutions where our own heroes have finally fought their way into positions of influence. This is the moral complexity that must not be sanitized or evaded. It is agonizing. It is dizzying. And it is the precise measure of the emergency we now face.

The Severity of the Threat: Why Callais Changes Everything

We must understand why the calculus has shifted so dramatically that such a request is no longer unthinkable but necessary. The Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana v. Callais is not a legal disagreement among reasonable minds. It is a deliberate, result-oriented act of judicial nullification, a 6-3 power play that disembowels Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act with a precision that must be called what it is: a betrayal of the Constitution, of Congress, and of the multiracial democracy this nation has always promised but never fully delivered. For sixty years, the VRA stood as the federal government’s most consequential acknowledgment that the franchise is not a gift from white power structures but a right that must be actively protected from them.

The Callais ruling declares, with the calm violence of legalese, that this era is over. In Louisiana, a map that finally gave Black voters a fair shot to elect a candidate of their choice has been discarded. Across the former Confederacy, legislative chambers are reading the signal clearly: the judiciary will no longer impede your efforts to make Black votes count less. The guardrail has been removed. The road to minority rule is paved and open.

This is the context that transforms a seemingly irrational ask into a rational, painful, and necessary strategy. When the courts have abdicated, when the legislature is gerrymandered into unaccountability, and when the ballot box itself is the very mechanism being rigged, the only remaining leverage lies in the economic and cultural spheres. The SEC is not merely a sports conference; it is the central nervous system of the white conservative political project in the South. Saturday afternoons in the fall and winter are not just games; they are rituals of regional identity, unmatched engines of fundraising, and the most powerful branding apparatus the states of the old Confederacy possess. A sustained boycott by a critical mass of Black athletes would hit this machinery precisely where it hurts: the balance sheet and the collective psyche. It would force university presidents, athletic directors, and corporate sponsors to make a choice between their profits and the political regimes that enable them. The goal is not to punish Dawn Staley; it is to make the state of South Carolina feel the cost of disenfranchising its Black citizens so acutely that the political calculus is forced to change.

The Impossible Choice: Weighing the Individual Against the Collective

Let us sit with the discomfort, for it is the heart of the matter. A Black mother in Atlanta has a daughter who is a generational point guard. She has been offered a full scholarship to play for Dawn Staley at South Carolina. To accept is to place her child under the wing of a woman who will not only develop her into a WNBA prospect but will teach her how to navigate a hostile world with her head held high. Staley’s program graduates players, builds character, and serves as a model of Black feminine power in a society that routinely denigrates both Blackness and womanhood. To turn down that offer is to potentially alter the trajectory of a young life in ways that cannot be calculated.

Yet that same mother must also reckon with the fact that her daughter’s presence in a Gamecocks uniform will be used by the state of South Carolina to project an image of racial harmony and opportunity that is a lie. Her daughter’s image, her excellence, her joy on the court will be monetized and deployed as propaganda for a regime that is actively working to ensure that Black grandmothers in Charleston and Columbia cannot elect representatives who care about their hospitals, their schools, or their air. The scholarship her daughter receives is funded, in part, by a state budget crafted by legislators elected from districts drawn to dilute Black voting strength. The arena she plays in was built with bonds backed by a taxpayer base that includes Black citizens who have been systematically robbed of their political voice. The NIL money that may come her way flows from booster collectives populated by white businessmen who write checks to voter suppression politicians on Monday and pose for pictures with her daughter on Saturday.

This is the impossible math that “Out of Bounds” forces Black families to calculate. It is the same brutal arithmetic that faced the parents who pulled their children out of segregated schools to march in Birmingham, who watched their livelihoods destroyed so that a generation might know freedom. The individual cost is real, intimate, and potentially devastating. The collective benefit is abstract, distant, and uncertain. And yet, every major advance in Black freedom in this country has been purchased by people who chose the abstract over the intimate, the collective over the individual, the long game over the short fix. The question is whether this generation, at this juncture, is prepared to make a similar accounting.

The Necessity: Why a Boycott Is the Only Language Power Understands

We must dispense with the fantasy that this legal assault can be countered through the ordinary channels it has just demolished. The Court has foreclosed legislative remedy by ignoring Congress’s intent. It has rendered future litigation a costly funeral procession for dead claims. The political leaders who gerrymander, disenfranchise, and suppress do not fear editorials or trending hashtags. They fear one thing: a disruption to the flows of money, prestige, and emotional allegiance that sustain their power.
When a four-star recruit from Atlanta chooses the University of Georgia, she is not just selecting a coach; she is injecting her talent, her likeness, and her family’s story into a narrative that bolsters the state’s economy and its political legitimacy. A sustained boycott, even by a disciplined minority of elite prospects, would force a reckoning. It would make the crisis their crisis. That is the definition of leverage, and it is the only currency that buys real change when voting booths have become facades.

The Possibility: Restructuring the Incentives of the Modern Athlete

The objection is immediate: the athletes will never do it. The modern economics of college sports, with Name, Image and Likeness deals and the frictionless transfer portal, has created a generation of rational individualists. This critique correctly identifies the collective action problem—the prisoner’s dilemma where the individual’s best short-term move is to defect from any group sacrifice—but it misunderstands that this dilemma is an engineering problem, and it can be solved.

First, the financial terror that blocks action must be neutralized through a Freedom Fund, capitalized by wealthy Black entertainers, progressive philanthropists, and the broad coalition that fuels movements like the Equal Justice Initiative. This fund guarantees the NIL income of any participating athlete. If a booster collective yanks a sponsorship in retaliation, the fund covers the loss, dollar for dollar. The prisoner’s dilemma collapses when the cost of cooperation is zero. This is not a fantasy; it is the logic of every strike fund in American labor history.

Second, the movement must manufacture selective incentives. A campaign celebrating “Freedom Riders 2.0” can make participation a career-defining marker of legacy and historical greatness. The free-rider who stays on the field becomes an object of quiet contempt. The blue-chip recruit who turns down an SEC offer for a program in a democracy-respecting state must be publicly honored and financially celebrated. For young adults attuned to public perception, these social costs and rewards can be as powerful as money.

Third, the strategy must exploit the power of small, high-trust groups. A call for every Black athlete in the SEC to walk out is a logistical mirage. A surgical intervention is far more plausible. The 2015 Missouri football strike that toppled a university president involved roughly 30 players. It required a cohesive, committed minority willing to occupy a facility and refuse to play. A similar action at a single flagship program, coordinated in the tight, accountable space of a locker room, would be an earthquake no media rights deal could insure against.

The Likelihood of Success: Why This Moment Is Ripe

Skeptics will mutter that this is improbable. But history instructs us. Successful boycotts—from Montgomery to the United Farm Workers’ grape strike—are forged by a catalytic moment, a sense of existential threat, and a disciplined core. Callais provides the existential shock. This generation of athletes is not apathetic; it is institutionally anxious, perfectly aware of its commodification, and digitally equipped to control its own narrative.

Moreover, the target is uniquely brittle. The SEC’s business model is a Jenga tower of media contracts, gambling partnerships, corporate sponsorships, and donor ego. It would take remarkably few strategic defections to introduce a crisis of confidence among the corporate partners who underwrite the spectacle. An insurance company does not want its logo on a screen where a star athlete explains why she is sitting out in defense of democracy. A soft drink conglomerate does not want its halftime show transformed into a teach-in on voter suppression. The leverage is structural, and it has never been priced into the asset because the asset has never flexed its full strength.

The Crossroads

Even with all of this, the moral agony of the choice remains. To ask a young Black woman to turn down Dawn Staley is to ask her to sacrifice a dream that is good and beautiful and earned. It is to ask her to walk away from a Black woman who fought through every barrier to stand where she stands, who represents the very excellence and self-determination the Voting Rights Act was meant to protect. It feels like a betrayal of Staley herself, a punishment of the very leader we should be celebrating.

And yet, Staley’s own journey—from the projects of North Philadelphia to the pinnacle of her profession—was made possible by a generation that made sacrifices precisely like the one now being asked. John Thompson did not get to build his Georgetown program in a vacuum of individual ambition. He built it on the shoulders of a movement that boycotted, that marched, that risked. The Voting Rights Act that Callais has now gutted was not handed down by benevolent white lawmakers. It was extracted by collective action so costly that it left blood on the Edmund Pettus Bridge.

The athletes of the SEC stand at a generational crossroads. On one path, they accept the deal on offer: individual wealth and achievement that makes them comfortable exceptions to a rule of communal political subjugation. It is a gilded silence, purchasing a fleeting scholarship and a first-round draft pick with the currency of a people’s disenfranchised future. On the other path lies something far more audacious and far more durable. It is the recognition that the power they hold is not a gift from the system but a muscle the system cannot function without.

The NAACP’s call is not an act of disrespect toward Dawn Staley, nor toward the four other Black women leading SEC programs with distinction. It is, in its most profound sense, an acknowledgment that their very presence has not been enough to change the political calculus of the states that employ them. Their excellence has been absorbed, celebrated, and ultimately neutralized by a machinery that is happy to crown Black queens on the court while stripping Black citizens of their crowns at the ballot box. The boycott is a demand that the contradiction be faced, that the celebration and the subjugation cannot coexist indefinitely.

A targeted, funded, and courageously executed boycott is not a withdrawal from the game. It is the ultimate assertion of ownership over the game—and over the democracy it has been used to undermine. The blueprint is there. The need is absolute. All that remains is the will to recognize that the true cost of a championship is now measured in the integrity of a vote, and the time to call that debt is now. The choice is heartbreaking. But the greatest heartbreak of all would be to discover, a generation from now, that the moral authority to act was squandered in exchange for a trophy that has long since gathered dust.

Coatesville’s Freshman Phenomenon: Colton Hiller’s

Allow me to introduce you to a young Chester County hustler on the hardwood, straight outta Coatesville.  Standing a proud 6’5″, this freshman named Colton Hiller steps onto the court like he’s been there a thousand times before, the kind of confidence you can’t teach but only admire. His jump shot? It’s a thing of beauty—pure poetry in motion. When he lets it fly, you’d swear he borrowed Jerry West’s stroke, tucking his elbow tight like a secret and pointing it at the rim like he’s aiming down the sights of destiny. The follow-through is the exclamation point, a silky salute to a ball that’s already thinking of kissing the net.

Coatesville freshman Colton Hiller

Coatesville has a history of breeding ballers who play the game like it’s second nature. Richard Hamilton made his way from these streets to UConn and then the NBA, gliding through defenders with the same ease he probably walked through hallways back in high school. John Allen took his hustle and tenacity to Seton Hall, and Jhamir Brickus—a magician with the rock—handled his business at La Salle before landing at Villanova. These legends built their names one bucket, one crossover, one clutch moment at a time.

And now there’s Hiller.

He’s got the body of a man and the raw talent of a prodigy, but his game is seasoned beyond his years. In addition to NBA 3-point long balls, he’s starting to master the art of the 1-2 dribble midrange, that lost treasure most players won’t dig for. The youngbul is moving like a chess player, thinking three steps ahead, and when the defense collapses, his passing finds teammates like a jazz musician hitting the perfect note.

Coatesville Head Coach John Allen

The next four years? They’ll be a ride for anyone lucky enough to watch this kid. He’ll play in packed gyms where the air buzzes with the dreams of a city that loves its basketball like family. Every game will add to the legend, every highlight reel another chapter in the story of Hiller. Where he’ll wind up after Coatesville is a question only time can answer. Will it be UConn, Seton Hall, Villanova—or some other kingdom where his game will reign supreme?

But for now, we get to sit back and enjoy the show, watching a young king rise. This is Coatesville basketball. This is history in the making. And Hiller? He’s writing it one jumper at a time.