Lots of wishful thinking here disguised as 'analysis.' None of us have a clue, but if any speculation makes sense, the most likely scenerio is using last years standings and the last system used, a lottery weighted in exactly the same way. Any other system imposed would be chosen arbitrarily and subject to charges of favortism of one group or another. Hell, the Detroits and Colorados of the world, with their hugely bloated salaries would likely even under a Cap have those bloated salaries grandfathered in for a number of years, why the hell would it be 'fairer' for one of them to have an equal, or any, chance at Crosby, Brule, or a top pick to add to that stable that they already have? How does that at all address competitive balance?
And the present system if used will have I would guess checks built in. If, for instance, Washington somehow beats the system again and has that less than ten percent chance come up again, who cares? To speculate further, if that Washington lottery win happens again, likely within four or five years they would have to shed either Crosby or AO to get under whatever cap comes in anyways, as whatever rookie spending cap is imposed ends for them.
But the greed of the bigger market bloated salary team's fans in jury-rigging the system in their fantasies here to add Crosby to teams that have huge payrolls already is rather annoying to read.