There certainly is a fine line -- the organization made a commitment to the player, brings him up, the fans are excited because they were eagerly awaiting his arrival, and then he struggles. Then decisions are made to help him and the team.
No, I'm not talking about Chourio, I'm talking about Sal Frelick. Stay with me.
Last year at opening day, the board was buzzing when Frelick was called up. Heck, people even thought he should have been called up the previous year. So, he struggles, then there are people, on the same board that was buzzing about him, calling for him to sit.
We are certainly a fickle bunch, aren't we?
What is the difference between Chourio and Frelick? A lot of years and a boat load of dollars under contract. Sure, Chourio has more talent than Frelick. However, does that give him a free pass: "Pinch-hitting in high-leverage situations does nothing to help Chourio develop..." when seeing pitches in the batter's box. If the only goal to getting a young player to see pitches at the plate, then you are spot on. I would argue there is more to a player being good than seeing pitches.
Remember, Murphy has decades more experience with young men of college age (Chourio fits that category) than some people on this board have been alive. I trust he knows what is doing not only in physical player development, but in mental player development. What does it mean to hit behind the runner? How do you learn before and during the game on how to attack the opposing team while in the batter's box? He's 20, so perhaps he needs to know how to grow up. All things that he has done with young men for a very long time.
Player development is more complicated than we think. Let's trust Murphy.