Being able to build a roster that is successful using the single-entry approach is a nice building block for daily fantasy success. In fact, many of today’s successful multi-entry players started off by using the single-entry approach (myself included). Being able to take the next step to be a successful multi-entry player is not easy. There is a common misconception out there that multi-entry players “always win” because they can “cover all the bases.” That notion couldn’t be further from the truth. In fact, the biggest thing you need to know before attempting to be a multi-entry player is this:

The security of your bankroll is at a much greater risk when you are taking the multiple-entry approach to tournament play.

That statement deserves its own line, paragraph, bold, underline, italics, or any other emphasis you wish to put on it. In fact, I wrote an entire course on bankroll management for RotoAcademy. It was an NFL-specific course, but there are plenty of principles within it that can be applied to all daily fantasy games. The multiple-entry tournament approach can pay off big, but it also puts you at a bigger risk to lose money faster. Just make sure you weigh the risk/reward nature of the multiple-entry approach before you start out on the journey. It’s certainly not for everyone.

Let’s say you’ve done the analysis above. You’re ready to take the next step and enter multiple lineups into tournaments on a regular basis. A word of note for clarity: for purposes of this discussion, “multiple” lineups should preferably refer to five or more lineups. If you are only moving to two or three lineups, the delineation between “single lineup” and “multiple lineups” isn’t that great. I mainly take the same approach as I would for a single entry if I am only doing two or three. How do you go about making these lineups, and how does the process differ from making a single lineup? Here are a few different methods people use to determine their multiple lineups:

1) Use as many player combinations as you possibly can, with the notion that “one is bound to hit.”

• I hate to use a baseball analogy in an NBA article, but this is akin to the notion of “stacking every team” in a baseball tournament, because one of them is bound to score a bunch of runs. Even when you do that, you have to have the right hitters and the right pitching combination to win a tournament. Massive diversity does not guarantee success. In fact, I would argue that massive diversity basically puts you in line with the field. In the long run, the field loses to the rake. This is not a viable long-term strategy.

2) Focus on a core of specific plays, while changing just a few players around on each roster.

• This is the boom-or-bust strategy of the bunch, but it is a strategy that is employed by many highly successful players. It carries just a bit too much risk for me, but the logic is obvious. If you pick a core of – say four or five players – and rotate a few players around them, the core is the key. If that core does well and just one of your secondary combinations hits, you are probably going to finish near the top of the tournament. Conversely, if your core struggles, you’re going to lose a large percentage of your entry fees (if not 100% of them) on that given night.

3) Make diversified lineups around a combination of 12-20 different players.

• This is the strategy I personally use. You don’t have the mega-risk of relying on a core of 4-5 players, and you don’t have the combinations of every player in the league. This gives you some diversity (not being dependent on the core), but it also gives you a strict enough group of players to choose from so that your rosters aren’t “watered down.” I enjoy mixing-and-matching combinations of the 12-20 players I like best while also trying to stay within the salary cap. If there is a player I really like, I will put him on 60-75% of my rosters, while if there is a player that I am unsure about, I will only put him on 20-30% of my rosters. The flexibility of this approach is great, and of course it has worked quite well for me.

There are hybrid approaches that you can take, too, but these are three of the most common ways to attack building multiple lineups in daily fantasy NBA. Obviously, you don’t have to stick to one approach. Find what works best for you and roll with it. My advice is to start at a very low dollar amount. This gives you the opportunity to get acclimated to the multi-entry approach before risking too much of your bankroll at it.

One final note is that sometimes the optimal approach can change based on the NBA schedule. If there is a night with only three or four games, it might be best to stick to a smaller core. If it is a full slate of 12-15 games, the optimal core might be larger. This is not a rigid, hard-line test. It’s all a matter of getting used to what works for you. Find that sweet spot, and you’ll be off to success in the multi-entry land. Just keep in mind that this is a risk/reward methodology, it’s not for everyone, and you won’t win every night. Make sure you fasten your seatbelt before you take off.