Lucas Pires Silva
2025/26 season archive
Lucas Pires is not in a 2026/27 Premier League squad, so these figures are final rather than live. Browse 2026/27 players.
Burnley
How he ranks
20 games · 119 defenders
Minutes and bonus
Where the points come from
85% of his points earned came from appearance. That is a narrow base — if it stops, most of the return stops with it. 40 earned, 25 net
Are the returns real?
He is falling short of his expected numbers by −2.1 over 1405 minutes.
There is no full season on record to compare it against.
Defensive Contribution
He averages 4.7 against a line of 10, so DefCon is not a realistic source of points for him.
Against each level of opponent
His return barely moves with the difficulty of the opponent.
1 is the easiest opponent, 5 the hardest. Bracketed figure is appearances at that level.
Gameweek log
| Opponent | ||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | TOT (A) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £4.0m |
| 2 | SUN (H) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £4.0m |
| 3 | MUN (A) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £4.0m |
| 4 | LIV (H) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £4.0m |
| 5 | NFO (H) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.9m |
| 6 | MCI (A) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.9m |
| 7 | AVL (A) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.9m |
| 8 | LEE (H) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.9m |
| 9 | WOL (A) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.9m |
| 10 | ARS (H) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.9m |
| 11 | WHU (A) | 9 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.9m |
| 12 | CHE (H) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.9m |
| 13 | BRE (A) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 14 | CRY (H) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 15 | NEW (A) | 42 | -3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | -11 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0 | 1 | £3.8m |
| 16 | FUL (H) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 17 | BOU (A) | 90 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 9 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 1.4 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 18 | EVE (H) | 90 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 26 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 19 | NEW (H) | 90 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 3 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 2.3 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 20 | BHA (A) | 90 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 5 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 1.4 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 21 | MUN (H) | 90 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | -1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.5 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 22 | LIV (A) | 90 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 15 | 0 | 16 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 3.2 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 23 | TOT (H) | 90 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 24 | SUN (A) | 90 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 25 | WHU (H) | 90 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 15 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 1.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 26 | CRY (A) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 27 | CHE (A) | 45 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 28 | BRE (H) | 90 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 7 | 0.0 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 2.3 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 29 | EVE (A) | 90 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 10 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.3 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 30 | BOU (H) | 16 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.9 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 31 | FUL (A) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 32 | BHA (H) | 8 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | -1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 33 | NFO (A) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 33 | MCI (H) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 35 | LEE (A) | 25 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 36 | AVL (H) | 90 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 3 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 1.4 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 37 | ARS (A) | 90 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 5 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 1.3 | 1 | 0 | £3.8m |
| 38 | WOL (H) | 90 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 17 | 0.3 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 2.1 | 0 | 0 | £3.8m |
What the model expects
From the same expected-points model that runs across the whole player pool — an estimate per gameweek, not a prediction of any single one.
Direction = last five gameweeks vs the five before. The model is injury-blind.
Points by gameweek · with model expectation
GW19–38: model expected 33 pts · he scored 16 (−17 vs expectation)