(my hopefully helpful two cents)
Well, the Byzantines actually handed over Thessaloniki to the Venetians in 1423 IOTL because of the local difficulties and the Venetians accepted due to the expected gains (although, they should have probably used the precedent of Athens as a warning).
Also, I think it's rather impossible. For one, Methoni and Koroni were important for securing communications between Venice and Crete, so the Venetians wouldn't want to hand over such a strategic point to the Byzantines, not when Ottoman raids deep into the Peloponnese showed the relative ineffectiveness of the Despotate's forces in repelling them. Furthermore, due to their position but also the relative peace in the Peloponnese at the time (and the fact that they were located in the end of most prospective routes for an attacker in the peninsula) which favoured agriculture and trade (again, relatively), the two cities and their hinderland were somewhat of a net contributor to the Venetian state (especially thanks to the olive oil produced there); whereas Thessaloniki was more of a drain of resources (and if the Venetians were asked to hand over territories in exchange for the city they would examine the conditions more than OTL I think), with the city having been intermittently cut of from the rest of Macedonia due to the civil wars, the Serbian invasions and then the Turkish raids and the Ottoman operations that brought the area under the latter's control after 1371 and thus experienced significant economic decline (which would make the occupation even more costly). The city would offer no significant strategic advantage and would instead place the Venetians in the line of fire from the Ottomans.
(I think Chalcidece had already been placed under Ottoman rule, although the situation at the time is a bit unclear to say the least)