Well, the problem with your schema is in the details. Kursk become a part of the Russian state in 1508 so Lithuania was an old history. It was repeatedly attacked by Polish-Lithuania (in 1612, 1616, 1617, 1634) but Kursk fortress was never taken. In the early 15th century, the Orioles territory was conquered by the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. The city was soon abandoned by its population, after being sacked either by Lithuanians or the Golden Horde. The territory became a part of the Tsardom of Russia in the 16th century. Polish intervention sacked it in 1611 and 1615; the population fled after the second sacking and moved to Mtsensk. Vyazma became Russian in 1494. So none of these cases is very encouraging in the terms of embracing the Polish rule and don’t forget the looting part. So none of them was under Catholic rule for too long: Catholicism was not enforced on all Lithuanian territories immediately after Union of Krewo and when the process started a number of the Russian princedoms of Lithuania went to the Muscovite state.
Smolensk was much more closely incorporated into the Grand Duchy. Even when the territory was under Russian control, Poland and Lithuania claimed it as a titular voivodeship. After the Polish siege of 1611 city was practically depopulated, which made polonization easier. Actually, it was quite successful: even a century after its reconquest by Russia the local Polish nobility was quite reluctant to get matrimonial links to their Russian neighbors.
Definition of the “Central Russia” is not quite clear but as you can see on the map, the PLC forces had been operating on a relatively small part of it. Not to count, of course, the looting raids by Lisowsky and the Ukrainian Cossacks. Even on most of that territory they did not and could not establish any reasonable administration or strong garrisons. Their main goal was to march on Moscow (looting everything on the way) in an optimistic expectation that as soon as they got there, all the problems are going to be solved, Wladislaw would be made a Tsar and the territory is going to be their to loot. This is the main problem with the conquest scenario: the realistic PLC military forces were not enough to provide uncontested occupation of the territory of that size and by their actions they alienated most of the local population and, with the exception of few top aristocrats whom they hold in Kremlin as the hostages, they could not expect cooperation. As far as Moscow itself was concerned, they burned most of it and did not have the numbers to hold even Kitaigorod, so even before the 2nd Opolchenie arrived they were restricted to holding Kremlin (and starving).
The following operations of 1612 were just the attempts of a relief force to break through. To get an idea about the forces involved, Chodkiewicz had 12,000 (plus 3,000 in Kremlin) and the Russians approximately 10,000. In 1618, when the Sejm financed the war, the PLC could raise 8,000 and up to 18,000 Cossacks joined in expectation of the loot. The Russians raised up to 11,500 and attempt to take Moscow failed. The point is that with the armies of that size conquest of the territory of that size (“Central Russia”) with a hostile population was not possible even with some quality superiority and a better top commander: Russians did not have a general of Chodkiewicz caliber.
Last edited: