Sorry about the delay on these comments, just getting to them all now.
You make some good points about the J7 hand, but I would be more apt to check back against a player that we know will feed us turn value with a high bet % and/or an opponent that will check raise a high % of draws on this board.
I really like being able to bet the flop against the average opponent because I don't think we're punished that heavily and it sets us up for a really advantageous value bet when the turn falls our way (non draw card, low card). Being able to sucker a light turn call out of our opponent in a larger pot than smaller pot can be a big advantage.

I think the turn was a spot to make a value bet though, when you can extract value from a weaker hand range, you usually want to do so and I just didn't see Kx being all that likely (nor Tx), so attacking draws that would be giving us good value when they call + any weaker pairs is a good decision in my mind.
On the river, I agree that the raise was not the best play, so why you call I guess can be explained in a few different ways. Showdown is good, the information is nice to have, but I'm flat calling there because a raise doesn't seem advantageous (not much makes sense that would min bet then call that we beat... maybe a very poorly played bottom pair, but that's not too common here) and a fold is too weak. That's more of the way I look at it, "what's the best decision and why" and since a raise and a fold are pretty poor decisions, it's a small bet and we have 3rd pair in a spot where villain is unlikely to have 2nd pair or top pair, we call.
I wouldn't say I'm calling as a primary reason to get info there though, as I'd call even if I was told I could not see villain's hand, win or lose.

Assuming it's allowed to use the charts in game, I honestly would just have way too much focus lost to be using charts constantly and flipping through them in a lot of these spots, especially if I had 2+ tables up.
I think it's worth putting the time in outside of the game to memorize some starting strategies. I don't really like to use most charts literally either. I like to know why they are made the way they are, which specific situations they are useful for and the sort of cutoff hands in certain spots (helps memorizing them faster).
Take the nash charts as an example... I don't really use those literally in most spots, vs most opponents. I have an approach that I've posted about many times over the years that ends up being more aggressive than nash sb vs an unknown opponent, and tighter than nash bb. The reason for the strategy is based on what the average unknown opponent does (shoves tighter than nash sb, and calls tighter than nash bb), so I've molded my unknown strategy to it. I could make an unknown chart, but in coming up with my strategy and talking with other players, it's become more natural to have it memorized, as I know what I am doing and why, rather than just trying to copy something else out there (and if you wanted to "copy" me, it would be better to just understand why I'm doing something and you can quickly play many hands based on reasoning rather than copying).
Another example are the zzz hyper helper charts. This is a better example, since his charts are much more useful in a literal sense than say the nash sb/bb charts (you wouldn't use those charts at 10-20bb ever, and you're not even defaulting into them either). zZz's charts are well built from a successful player and his calculations/samples/experience/hard work. They are put into a form that I think is best benefitted by studying, sort of memorizing and understanding where and why they change. That way, you can easily change in game.
A pattern here is that you're memorizing and understanding, rather than referencing and trying to copy in game. When you try to do the latter, I think you lose a lot of focus on the game at hand, and you can lose focus on other important things going on. You also lose the ability to easily adjust if you're just trying to reference a chart in every situation. I see overuse a lot from people too (not in this video necessarily, just overall), where they try to make each spot an "easy decision I can make by looking at a chart." That takes the thinking out of the game and the charts are nowhere near comprehensive enough to work well in a wide range of spots.
I also see some suspect charts. There are many guys that just make charts that seem to have more fun making the charts than thinking about the plays involved. These are usually far less popular, private charts (hobbyists sometimes, but regs sometimes too), but this sort of thing can hurt your game more than help it and that's the opposite of what we want.
The last thing I want to say on this topic is that I often find the motivation for people wanting to use charts for more and more decisions is that it is a fairly low brain activity thing (you don't have to think, just copy). At the end of the day, if you can understand situations better (like a good 3betting range vs a player that open raises the top 60% of hands and rarely 4bet jams and plays passive postflop) and why and where they change, a lot of decisions will become lower brain activity and automatic to you, and you'll be making far better decisions than by trying to fit a chart made for a limited amount of situations into situations that it just isn't applicable to.