No, it would be the Warriors first IMO. While they may be a big market team now due to their success and popularity, they were not a big market team 10-12 years ago. They may have had a bigger media market than NOLA but their product was worse and there was little interest in the franchise. Brooklyn is a big market team but its just as hard for them to attract top quality players due to the same reasons. The the article below explaining markets. It's fluid when dealing with teams outside of NY and LA. They were amongst the worst teams in revenue, attendance and Television deals.
https://www.quora.com/Which-NBA-team...g-Market-teams
The warriors built it off of the draft and a new style of play.... Period. Their style has transformed the NBA as we know it. The Warriors have made it an art of fitting pieces together with blend of veterans and draft picks that come in and serve a certain role unselfishly. I would not argue that the Spurs have done the same thing, especially when they don't spend the type of money that the Warriors have but the Spurs core players for years were older players that they filled pieces around. I'd just prefer to build through young exciting players with a brand of ball that brings people to watch.