I’m used to seeing the GB column (games behind) in the published baseball standings, but I now see a WC column as well. I know how to compute GB, but I don’t know what WC is or how it’s computed. Can anyone help?
Wild Card Games Behind. I’m not sure how to compute it either because it involves how well the 2nd place teams in all three regions are doing.
Not quite right. To find the two wild card teams, first ‘throw out’ the three division leaders. The two teams with the next best records are the current wild-card teams. ‘WCGB’ is the number of games behind the second of those two teams.
For instance, at this moment in the AL, Boston leads the East with a 10-6 record; KC leads the Central with a 9-5 record, and the Angels lead the West with an 8-5 record. The team with the next best record is Seattle, at 9-6. They are the #1 wild-card team. The team with the next best record after Seattle is Cleveland at 8-7, so Cleveland is the #2 wild-card team. So for everybody else, ‘wild-card games back’ is how far that team is behind Cleveland.
Note that the two wild-card teams could be from the same division.
Depending on how the standings are displayed, sometimes you’ll see one team with something like “+3.5” in the WCGB column. This means that this team is the #1 wild card team and is 3 1/2 games ahead of the #2 wild card team.
I do believe that there’s a further stipulation neither can be from the same division as the division winner but I’m not sure. By oh, June or so, the DBacks are so far in the hole It’s never been worthwhile looking it up.
That doesn’t sound right but it does sound similar to a rule before the expansion of the wild card.
Back when there was still a single wild card team, that team could not face its division leader in the Divisional Round.
After they added the 2nd wild card, wild card teams can potentially face their division leaders in the Divisional Round or the LCS.
@Great_Antibob is correct.
Both wild-card teams can be from the same division. Wild-card teams play each other in a one-game playoff, with the winner advancing to play the division winner with the best record in the league. And, yes, the wild-card winner could potentially play a division rival in the Divisional Round.
You could get a case where teams have to play a tie breaker game after the regular season (game 163) to determine who wins the division and who is a wild card. They can’t then meet in the in the WC game, but they can meet in the next round.
Three way tiebreakers are even more complex, but I think it’s possible to play the same team back-to-back, each being an elimination game for at least one of them.
I’m trying to envision a scenario where this could occur, but I cannot. Maybe somebody can come up with such a possibility?
By definition, an ‘elimination game’ eliminates the loser from any more playoff games. If Team A eliminates Team B in a playoff game, the season is over for Team B.
I thought there was a way in a 3 way tie for 2 wildcard spots there’s a way for that to happen, but I started reading the process and my brain hurt so I decided to have lunch instead.
It’s definitely possible for a 3 way tie-breaker to result in back to back elimination games.
In the scenario with a 3 way tie for the 2 wild cards, the first elimination game would be to settle the second wild card spot - which would be the 164th game for that team after losing the game for the first wild card spot. And then the wild card game itself as the second elimination game.
There was even a reasonable shot of it in the NL in 2019.
How to envision this:
After Game 162, if you have Teams A, B, and C all tied for the 2 wild cards, then:
A vs B (Winner gets 1st wild card, Loser to Play Team C for 2nd wild card).
Say Team A wins, then
B vs C as an playoff elimination game for the 2nd wild card.
Say Team B wins (it has played one elimination game already)
Wild card game: A vs B (B is playing its second elimination game in a row, A is playing its first elimination game)
Basically there’s a ‘mini’ playoff between the 3 teams to get into the regular playoffs.
So how is it decided which 2 of the 3 teams play first and which one sits out?
There are tiebreakers for that. 
Games against similar opponents, etc. The general rule used to be that while tiebreakers may dictate seeding for games, actual games must be played to determine if you’re in or out of the playoffs. When there was a single wildcard team, and everyone played a full playoff series it didn’t really matter that much if you were a wildcard or a division winner. Now that the two wildcards play a one game elimination, you need an actual game to determine if a team wins the wildcard or the division title.
Yes, in this scenario, Team B is playing its second elimination game in a row. Team B played Team C in its first elimination game, and played Team A in its second such game.
But @Telemark thought that it might be possible for two teams to play back-to-back, with each game being an elimination game for at least one of them. Team B is not playing Team A in back-to-back games.
Now it’s definitely time for lunch!
Like I said, for the team I follow it’s all moot by June, anyway.
I think what needs to happen is that teams would play game 162, which would result in either one team winning the last wc spot or the two teams tying. So it was essentially an elimination game for 1 team and not the other. If they end the season tied the same two teams have to play another elimination tiebreaker game for both teams. Then, once the final WC position is determined, that team plays another elimination game.
It’s wild that in theory, a team can take anywhere between 11 and 22 games after the regular season to win the World Series.
It’s still only 20 maximum. Tiebreakers are considered part of the regular season.
Ok, I stand corrected. Between 11 and 22 games after Game 162 then.
Reviving this thread because there’s a reasonable chance we end up with a 4 way tie for the two wildcard spots today. Toronto and Seattle are effectively playing an elimination game today. The Red Sox and Yankees are guaranteed at least a tie breaker game.