I understand the point you are trying to make, but I got the feeling it's hard to compare the Uzbeks (even in the 17th century) with Iran, much less the Ottomans and the Mughals, both of which comprised larger, much more populous (which meant more economically developed) and relatively more sophisticated in the technological aspect.
I'm not trying to say the Uzbeks were some Medieval-level steppe barbarian horde. They sat exactly upon a vital part of the Silk Road, of course, but by the 17th Century I'm not sure if even their greatest urban centers (I'm thinking about Samarkand and Bukhara) could compare with northwestern India or Thrace and Anatolia. This, coupled with their relative geographic remoteness of Central Asia in the geopolitics of the 16th/19th Centuries, might have handicapped their potential, especially due to the lack of weapon production, until at least the Russians came knocking.
Perhaps an interesting scenario would be one in which Safavid Iran collapses into a warlord era of sorts, or at least becomes weakened, allowing an Uzbek takeover of eastern Iran or even the southern Caspian littoral. Increasing the Uzbek political and economic base in Asia could certainly help them in the path towards "Westernization" (and I promise I'm not trying to push in some Vicky 2 gimmick). An early PoD could allow for such a gradual takeover, especially if it coincides with the height of the Ottoman presence in the Middle East (thus further weaking Persia). In this scenario, the Uzbeks could perhaps mirror in Iran the Mughal conquest of northern India.