How NHL stars feel about 4 Nations Face-Off overtime rules

MONTREAL — Zach Werenski would like to see a longer overtime. Brock Nelson is open to the idea. Aleksander Barkov sounds skeptical. Patrik Laine couldn’t care less. Nathan MacKinnon wants no part of it.

After the opening game of the 4 Nations Face-Off provided a first look at a 10-minute overtime period — a rule change instituted for this short best-on-best tournament — there is a total lack of consensus among players about whether or not to institute such a change for the 82-game regular season, where the overtime format has long been a talking point.

MacKinnon caused a stir Wednesday night when he described himself as completely gassed during the extra period of Canada’s 4-3 overtime win over Sweden — when Mitch Marner scored at the 6:06 mark, meaning the game would have gone to a shootout under regular season rules. But in the very same answer, the Avalanche star said he might be open to a seven-minute OT, and mere minutes earlier, Connor McDavid sounded positive about the new format.

“I think it’s a good little trial run to see how it works,” McDavid said. “I don’t think anyone wants to see it go to a shootout. The players, the fans, nobody does, so it’s good to have a little bit of extra time. Obviously if we didn’t have that, we would’ve ended this one in a shootout.”

At least in the best-on-best format, players are generally happy that there’s less chance things will end in a glorified skills competition.

“Obviously shootouts can be a lot of fun,” Barkov said. “But I think when there are so many talented guys, skilled guys playing three-on-three hockey, I think it’s probably one of the best things to watch, how much skill there is on the ice.”

Based on Wednesday’s overtime, when Canada and Sweden played dramatic, end-to-end hockey throughout, that is certainly true.

The regular season, though, is not best-on-best, and the three-on-three format has proven to be hit or miss, with some overtimes turning dull as teams prioritize possessing the puck over everything else. And over 82 games, there would be concern about the extra toll on players.

“If you just keep adding longer and longer overtimes, I don’t know how guys would take it,” Barkov said. “I’m fine with how it is right now. I’ll do whatever would be the decision.”

Nelson, who described himself as indifferent but up for trying it, hit the nail on the head.

“I guess it all goes back to the question of whether someone wants to decide it in a shootout,” he told The Post.

One thing that could help keep players fresh if the NHL chooses to lengthen overtime would be adopting another rule change for this tournament: adding 30 seconds to TV timeouts while taking a minute off each intermission break.

Of course, that also gives coaches leeway to play their top guys even more, so perhaps it would have the opposite effect in practice.

“Your top guys go on and if it’s a back-to-back, it takes a lot out of you,” Werenski said. “It’d be something to mess around with, I think. Especially maybe preseason or something,just to see how guys feel.

“I wouldn’t be opposed to going to 10 minutes. But seeing MacKinnon’s comments, he was pretty gassed it looked like. It takes a lot out of you.”