Thanks for all of the replies and information, fellas.  Sorry it took me this long to reply, but I've been out of town and typing/posting on the phone is a pain!
 
I've redeveloped my room's and desk's measurements in AutoCAD much better, and I intend to see if I can move things around a bit to see what happens.  From what I've sifted through online, the recommendation is to have the desk face a "long wall."  Given a big window area with opening plantation shutters, the desk is sort of stuck in the corner, as seen in the pic in the first post.  I can rotate the desk and monitors 90 degrees so that it is against the "long wall," but then the back of the left monitor will face directly into a corner; probably highly undesirable!  It will, however, be almost 2 ft. from the wall/corner, so perhaps that will help as well.  The keep the orientation as is and pull everything back from the wall another 2 ft. or so.  This introduces additional problems as my 30 in. monitor is mounted to the wall via a radial-arm-swivel-mount, which in turn sets it back off the desk's edge so the viewing distance is more appropriate (i.e. 36 in.).  If sweep tests confirm an improvement is made, then I can always put the monitor back on its stand and set it on a small table.  Wait, maybe that old keyboard stand with an added shelf can be used!

Thanks for all of the replies and information, fellas.  Sorry it took me this long to reply, but I've been out of town and typing and posting on the phone is a PITA!

I've redeveloped my room and desk's measurements in AutoCAD, and I intend to see if I can move things around a bit to see what happens.  From what I've sifted through online, the recommendation is to have the desk face a "long wall."  Given a big window area with opening plantation-shutters, the desk is sort of stuck in its current position, as seen in the pic in the first post.  I can, however, rotate the desk and monitors 90 degrees so that faces the "long wall," but then the back of the left monitor will face directly into a corner--probably highly undesirable!  It will, however, be almost 2 ft. from the wall and corner, so perhaps that will help. Another idea is to keep the orientation as is but pull everything back from the wall another 2 ft. or so.  This introduces a problem with the LCD monitor, as it's a 30 incher that is mounted to the wall via a radial-arm-swivel-mount  This sets it back off the desk's edge but keeps the viewing distance appropriate (i.e. 36 in.).  If sweep tests confirm an improvement is made, then I can always put the monitor back on its stand and set it on a small table.  Wait, maybe that old keyboard stand with an added shelf can be used!

 

I'm far from being an expert here, but my nearfield speaker instructions have them placed a lot further off the wall than shown in your drawing.
 
Having said that, I ain't got the room anyway so mine are up to the wall too, and to hell with the consequences... What I have done, however, is put a ninety degree pipe elbow into the port at the back of the speaker.
 
(I see that Dave has already mentioned this in his post)
 
cheers
 
andy

synkrotron
I'm far from being an expert here, but my nearfield speaker instructions have them placed a lot further off the wall than shown in your drawing.
 
Having said that, I ain't got the room anyway so mine are up to the wall too, and to hell with the consequences... What I have done, however, is put a ninety degree pipe elbow into the port at the back of the speaker.
 
(I see that Dave has already mentioned this in his post)

The KRK Rokit 6's are front-ported, but I agree.  I may stuff some socks into the ports to see what happens.
 
In the current arrangement, I did move the speakers forward as far as I could go, with the space being about 11-1/2" from the back wall.  I kept the test microphone in the listening position and ran a sine-sweep.  The lower frequency peaks actually got worse!  The "flattest" response with good stereo imaging, at this point in time, seems to be the equilateral-triangle config with the speakers close to the wall.  Furthermore, spreading the speakers further apart did level out the bottom-end peaks, but it did introduce new peaks in the 400-500Hz range.  Plus this is probably not preferred because of phasing and/or imaging issues.
 
My next test will be to move the entire setup an additional two feet away from the wall.  That's about as far as I can practically go without making the entire room useless.

Something to consider...this guy had horrible room dimensions (8' x 8' x 9'). He gives detailed construction info but does not talk about the physics - this is a bass trap that falls into the category of resonant panel absorbers. Normally, the filler is fiberglass and I don't know why he used activated carbon (I'll have to research that). Also unsaid in the video is that the dimensions of the absorbers are determined by frequencies you want to absorb, so you'd want to consult some charts before settling on the dimensions. The Master Handbook of Acoustics has a chart and explanation of how these absorbers work.
 

Oh my! That is a challenging room! I'm not sure what I'd do with that space, but the good news is that you do have a lot of space to work with. I would not get locked into the orientation in your drawing, I'd have to seriously consider facing that big window on the right side of the drawing. Not sure how one keeps things symmetrical at that point, but that's what strikes me.

bitflipper
Something to consider...this guy had horrible room dimensions (8' x 8' x 9'). He gives detailed construction info but does not talk about the physics - this is a bass trap that falls into the category of resonant panel absorbers. Normally, the filler is fiberglass and I don't know why he used activated carbon (I'll have to research that). Also unsaid in the video is that the dimensions of the absorbers are determined by frequencies you want to absorb, so you'd want to consult some charts before settling on the dimensions. The Master Handbook of Acoustics has a chart and explanation of how these absorbers work.
 

Thanks for this information.  I too have come across information regarding activated-charcoal absorbers.  Very strange, but off the top of my head, I can understand why: it's super-porous and dense (good for low frequencies?), it will fill a specific volume, and the volume's total surface area of the little pieces is huge.  Seems like a no-brainer!  Audio "filtration" if you will!

wst3
Oh my! That is a challenging room! I'm not sure what I'd do with that space, but the good news is that you do have a lot of space to work with. I would not get locked into the orientation in your drawing, I'd have to seriously consider facing that big window on the right side of the drawing. Not sure how one keeps things symmetrical at that point, but that's what strikes me.

It's a big space and it should be considered for sure.  Thanks for your input!