Once again I admire your beautiful paintjobs. You've got an eye for colours, and highlighting is spot on.

Re your choices: If you really want to field phalanxes, it boils down to Pyrrhos (or any other successor in mainland Greece) and Ptolemaic Egypt. The phalanx required some kind of levy or militia system by which a great number of men could be called to arms. The state/monarch then also had to cover at least part of their expenses for equipment. Neither the poleis of the Achaean League nor Sparta would have been able to muster and maintain phalangites in sufficient numbers. They could've hired mercenary formations, of course. However, unwieldy phalanxes were generally ill-suited to the kind of warfare that Greek city-states were accustomed to, i.e. raids, seaborne attacks and (short) sieges. Wars within Greece were won by attrition rather than big battles.
Re Pyrrhos' thureophoroi: I guess there's little evidence. If the thureos was adopted from the Celts, it was probably not in use among the Greeks before the Celtic incursion of 279 BC. However, Pyrrhos employed a lot of mercenaries, including Celts, so he might have had 'proto-thureophoroi' in his army, who knows? I wouldn't get too fussy about these things, there's a lot of (mostly) educated guesswork involved.