Like any portfolio, diversification is key. I think a mix of kids that you hope are 4-year kids out of high school plus transfers is still appropriate.
I don't want Richmond to be Eric Mussleman U, or Mark Schmidt South. I want it to be a place where we do grow and develop our own, and then supplement each year with a key transfer or three. It seems like a healthy balance, and I think important for a program and for culture that we don't actively promote such a transactional approach. The pendulum will swing back this direction (perhaps after the last of the covid-year kids run out of eligibility) and we want to be able to promote ourselves as a place where a player can grow and contribute.
Or, to take the Moneyball approach -- where's the inefficiency? Soon enough all of the P5 are going to be Eric Musselman U, and the inefficiency will be the Top 150--300 HS kids that otherwise would have had a spot at a P5 that don't now.