You are making way more out of my statement than necessary. Your own 'successfully run situationally' isn't all that big a reach from my own 'some balance' in its meaning. I followed my sentence with 'our already superior passing game can take us to the next level overall.'
I've also stated that we've likely improved our passing game with the acquisitions of Robinson & Kyren Williams along with the healthy return of Higbee, so between this and my hope for an improved OL/rush game doesn't constitute asking for a 50/50 balance in our offensive scheme. 'Some' means just that, as in 'some' improvement. There is no straw man, drawing the two concepts of helping our rush/OL is completely relevant to applying a little more or 'some' balance to our offense.
Since you seem to want to belabor this, I'll respond.
Improving "balance" suggests that you think the Rams should run the ball more, or in a higher proportion relative to passing plays (they ran the ball just over 40% of the time last year). I don't think that is particularly important.
What I do think is important is that the Rams are more successful when they do elect to run the ball. Last year, the Rams averaged 4.0 ypc. I think it would be very beneficial if that stat shows significant improvement (something in the 4.3 or better range would be nice).
So, yes... there are different ways of defining "improvement" in the running game. To answer your strawman - we all agree that improvement, in general, is a good thing.
How that is measured, on the other hand... reasonable minds may differ.