- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
Quantifying Quarterbacks is an NFL Draft focused quarterback charting project geared toward providing as much information about as much of a quarterback's recent career as possible. Over 20 data points are recorded for any given pass attempt, ranging from down-and-distance, personnel grouping, play-action, depth of target, accuracy, and much more. Quantifying Quarterbacks charts the entirety of a quarterback's final college season, as well as a smaller sample (four games) from their previous season. All of this charting is done manually by me during and after the college football season. For a more in-depth look at what exactly Quantifying Quarterbacks is, here is a link to last year's final product: 2020 Quantifying Quarterbacks.
Distance (Usage Rate)
2/9 (1 TD)
5/11 (2 TD)
15/44 (2 TD)
6/15 (1 TD, 1 INT)
3/6 (1 TD)
7/8 (1 TD)
8/16 (2 TD)
24/45 (5 TD, 1 INT)
8/19 (1 TD, 2 INT)
21/29 (1 TD)
53/83 (2 TD, 2 INT)
12/17 (1 TD)
14/19 (3 TD)
20/29 (4 TD, 2 INT)
48/70 (8 TD, 2 INT)
18/21 (2 TD)
24/30 (1 INT)
35/41 (5 TD)
93/111 (7 TD, 1 INT)
54/95 (5 TD, 3 INT)
62/99 (5 TD, 1 INT)
103/134 (11 TD, 2 INT)
53/67 (4 TD)
284/408 (25 TD, 6 INT)
Games Charted: Clemson (2019), Arkansas (2019), Ole Miss (2019), Georgia (2019), All 2020 regular season
Blatant Drops: 15 (3.63%)
Forced Adjustments: 20 (4.84%)
Contested Drops: 31 (7.51%)
Passes Defended: 35 (8.47%)
Explosive: 37 (8.96%)
Purely in terms of target rate, Texas A&M Kellen Mond has one of the most interesting profiles I can remember. Mond only threw roughly 13% of his passes behind the line of scrimmage, which is a below-average rate and somewhat encouraging in that he was not needing to rely on “gimme” throws.
He also threw a ton of passes over the intermediate part of the field. Exactly 31% of Mond’s passes went to the 11-20 yard area, good for the highest rate in the class. By all accounts, that is the toughest section of the field to throw to and is, to me, the most valuable when trying to project NFL success. It’s a nice sign that HC Jimbo Fisher felt comfortable letting him rock and roll on those kinds of concepts.
However, Mond showed a rare aversion to testing defenses vertically, which makes very little sense considering how aggressive he can be to other areas of the field. At just 10.65%, Mond is one of only two passers since 2020 to throw less than 13% of their passes beyond 20 yards. The only other passer to do so over that span is Washington State’s Anthony Gordon (9.83%). To be fair, Gardner Minshew, Dwayne Haskins, and Daniel Jones all finished between 10-13% in the 2019 class, so it’s not like Mond’s low rate of deep passes instantly makes him a UDFA-caliber player, but it is still a tad disheartening.
Mond’s aversion to throwing down the field makes sense through a different lens, though. He is not good at it. Mond only delivered accurate passes on 29.55% of his throws beyond 20 yards, which is the worst mark since 2019. Jarrett Stidham, Nate Stanley, Anthony Gordon, Jake Fromm, and Jacob Eason are the other five quarterbacks over that span to dip below 40%. That’s not encouraging company to hold, especially when Mond is the worst among them in this regard.
As a result of this aversion and inability to throw down the field, Mond’s production of explosive passes was poor. Mond only generated an explosive pass on 8.96% of his passes, which is the lowest rate between the last two classes. The only other QB under 10% is Utah State’s Jordan Love. Sure, Love ended up as a first-round pick anyway, but he was a terribly inconsistent player and that is not the most encouraging company for Mond to have. For what it’s worth, none of the other 2021 QBs charted thus far produced an explosive play rate lower than 12.50%.
Editor’s Note: Get an edge with our premium Betting Tools that are packed with live odds, betting trends, predictions, player prop projections, our extensive Edge Finder and much more. And don't forget to use promo code WELCOME10 to get 10% off. Click here to learn more!
ACCURACY AND ENVIRONMENT
Adjusted Accuracy: 69.46%
Outside the Pocket Percentage: 10.41%
Adjusted Accuracy Outside the Pocket: 60.23%
Under Pressure Percentage: 22.52%
Adjusted Accuracy Under Pressure: 58.49%
Most Common Personnel Package: 11 personnel (43.10%)
Shotgun Percentage: 99.76%
Empty Formations Frequency: 9.44%
Play-Action / RPO Percentage: 26.15%
Play-Action Adjusted Accuracy: 68.98%
Designed Rollout Frequency: 6.05%
As expected of someone with such an atrocious deep ball, Mond’s overall accuracy numbers are not too favorable. The silver lining is that his number is dragged down in large part because of his poor deep passing numbers, not because he is bad across the board. Mond’s accuracy to the 11-15 yard area, which he targeted at an obscene rate, would have been in line with the 2020 average and is only below-average in 2021 because the top of this class is uber-talented. He is also only slightly below average to the 6-10 yard area, and about average in the 1-5 area. Though not the most accurate guy around, Mond is at least capable up to about 15 yards, even if inconsistent.
It is also worth noting that Mond got the benefit of play-action far less often than his peers. Granted, Mond was not stellar on those reps, but only 26.15% of his passes were off of play-action. No other QB charted in this class so far dipped below 30%, and the average between the other six charted 2021 QBs so far is 39.81%. Perhaps if more of those passes were in the offense, Mond may have put up slightly better numbers.
As for Mond’s other two situational accuracy numbers, the results are a mixed bag. When operating under pressure, Mond did quite well. Mond’s 58.49% adjusted accuracy under pressure is better than Trey Lance and within 1.5% of both Trevor Lawrence and Zach Wilson. Considering Mond was pressured on over 20% of his snaps (some of that being his fault with how long he will hold the ball), those are pretty good results for Mond.
However, when pushed outside the pocket, Mond was less inspiring. 60.23% adjusted accuracy outside the pocket is not horrific, but it’s comfortably below-average relative to this year’s class of stud playmakers. The number is made even less inspiring by the fact that Mond only threw 10.41% of his passes outside the pocket, yet 6.05% of his total passes were designed rollouts. More than half of Mond’s attempts outside the pocket were by design and he was still pretty middling. For someone of his physical tools, I was hoping for a bit more in this department.
Avg. Number of Pass Rushers: 4.44
Three or Fewer Pass Rushers Frequency: 9.69%
Four Pass Rushers Frequency: 48.91%
Five Pass Rushers Frequency: 30.27%
Six or More Pass Rushers Frequency: 11.14%
Mond faced above-average rates of five-or-more rushers, coming in at a total of 41.41%. Though not the highest in this year’s class (Trey Lance and Jamie Newman both have him beat), that is a higher rate than the average QB between the 2020 and 2021 classes. His numbers to each of the two areas (five-man and six-plus man) are not crazy high, though, whereas both Lance and Newman held absurd numbers in one of the two areas. Mond’s high rate is more of a collective product rather than seeing a ton of five-man rushes (Lance) or six-plus man rushes (Newman).
3rd/4th Down Adjusted Accuracy: 66.88%
3rd/4th Down Conversion Rate: 50.89%
4th Quarter/Overtime Adjusted Accuracy: 73.81%
Red Zone Adjusted Accuracy: 60.71%
3rd/4th down is where Mond shined the most among these categories. Though his 66.88% adjusted accuracy is below average, converting at a 50.89% clip is pretty solid. That’s better than the 2020 average and better than a handful of this year’s star QBs, namely Lawrence, Wilson, and Lance. Similar to how Mond fared decently under pressure, it’s clear that some of the burdens and sticky situations that come with playing quarterback do not phase Mond. That’s a good baseline trait to have, even if Mond is shaky elsewhere.
Unfortunately, Mond was far less effective in the red zone. The red zone requires quarterbacks to be exceptionally quick with their processing and finish plays with accuracy into tight windows. While Mond has shown instances of both in his play, he is consistent in neither area, which is an issue exacerbated in the red zone when every single play requires both traits to be clicking.
It is tough to get too excited over Mond's profile as a "diamond in the rough" type. His accuracy numbers were mostly mediocre and there is no clear area where he shines above his peers. Many of Mond's best areas were slightly above-average, not stellar. In turn, any belief in Mond as a potential starter down the road is going to have to be film-based and under the assumption that Mond can iron some things out. Considering he did make strides in his processing and decision making in his final year under HC Jimbo Fisher, perhaps there is some reason to believe that development can continue.
Even still, Mond's best and final season was filled with inconsistencies and it is tough to imagine a player who runs so hot and cold will suddenly stop doing so in the NFL. The range of outcomes for Mond is somewhere between Josh Dobbs and a significantly watered-down Ryan Tannehill. That is not enough for Mond to be worth a top-75 pick, but perhaps towards the back end of the third round or during the early portion of Day 3 is fine.