In some cases, yes. The Coverdale Psalter is vastly superior to the KJV Psalter for singing, which is why its in the Book of Common Prayer, despite the scripture lessons being from the KJV.
And in the case of the words of our Lord, these were translated from Aramaic to Greek in most cases, except in scenarios where He would have spoken Greek, for example, with Pontius Pilate, or in the Revelation to St. John. The Peshitta translations help clarify the Aramaic substrate to his stories and expose His Semitic wit.
Remember, in the fourth and early fifth century, two rival religions laid claim to the Bible, the Nicene Christians and our Arian persecutors. We know Constantinople and Rome ordered 50 bibles each from Alexandria, and another 50 from Eusebius of Caesarea, who was an Arian. I believe the so called Alexandrian text type actually consists of three manuscripts from Caesarea, because the Coptic Bibles and later Greek Bibles from Alexandria follow the Byzantine text, like the Peshitta and the Vulgate. But the reality is we have no idea who wrote Sinaiticus, Vaticanus or Alexandrinus, only where they were acquired or stolen from, in the case of Sinaiticus.
Also, the Vulgate and Peshitta represent reliable snapshots of the Bible as used by the Christians, because we know Arianism was always rejected by the Syriac Christians thanks to the influence of St. Ephraim, and we know that St. Jerome was as pro-Trinitarian and anti-Arian as you could get, to the point that he was part of the faction, including St. Epiphanios the bishop of Salamis* that held Origen accountable for Arianism (I have looked at the evidence and think St. Jerome’s nemesis St. Lucifer of Cagliari** and the Cappadocians St Gregory the Theologian, his best friend St. Basil, and basils siblings, most notably St. Gregory of Nyssa, were correct in supporting Origen; Arius was instructed by Lucian of Antioch, and the central Arian doctrine, that there was a time when the Son was not, was contrary to the writings of Origen).
So, we can assert that the Peshitta and Vulgate allow us to validate Greek translations, because they were translated from Greek sources.
This all being said, it is all irrelevant, because as
@MarkRohfrietsch pointed out, highly favored by God and full of grace are semantically equivalent.
*Epiphanios wrote tracts against heresy which are worth reading, despite his boring polemic against Origen.
** This is where you previously defended St. Jerome, because in Daniel he translated “Star of the Morning” as “Light bringer” or Lucifer, inadvertently causing the false teaching that Lucifer, the name of several Christian martyrs and the Nicene bishop of Cagliari, is the proper name of the devil, which I disproved in a prior thread.*** And the KJV copied him, because this passage was popular, and it also copied him with the Comma Johanneum in 1 John 5. The KJV also consulted the Peshitta. The Old Testament in the KJV was not purely translated from the Masoretic, nor the New Testament from the Majority Text. And frankly, if you are quoting newer editions like the NIV, and the third edition of the NIV is more problematic than any of the Alexandrian manuscripts.
*** If satan had a proper name, other than satan, it is probably Samael or Azael, but I believe Samael, if he exists, is probably a different and legitimate archangel and Azael something else, and whatever name the devil had, he forfeit it when he rebelled, and is now our adversary or the evil one. Indeed, we are not obliged to capitalize the designations of the devil, because his name is undefined.
