The point is: they were all at least phisically or culturally - and in a lot of cases both - much closer to Iran or being iranian than the Ottomans were.No not really. It was Parthia. All their nobles were Parthian, their officers were all Parthians and all their administrators were Parthian.
The Sassanians were an authentic Persian dynasty, however their powerbase remained in Mesopotamia, away from the iranian plateau, the homeland of the iranians
The Saffarid powerbase was in Herat, Khorasan and Balochistan, not the Iranian Plateau
Ikhanate's power base was in modern Azerbaijan and Azeri Iran today, and almost the entirety of their government, army, administration, officers, were Turks, and Mongols.
True enough, however the distance between Algiers and Constantinople is the same as Constantinople to Kabul. The distance does not really matter. Good governance does, and in the early modern era, that largely depends on the kinds of governors put in place rather than anything else.
And while the distance might be the same from Constantinople but I have a suspicion than Algiers could be reached much faster by water than Kabul by any mean at the time.
And yeah good government will solve a lot of hurdles. But the problem with such great phisical and cultural distances are that they exacerbate the effect of bad government. If a governor on the balkans is so bad that it can cause a rebellion or has ideas of independence Constantinople will get information way faster and especially react way faster than in Iran.