Things to not add up, but that could just be the Knicks being the Knicks and Dolan being Dolan.
However, if the Knicks are "desperate to keep Melo" wouldn't they have fired Woodson by now? Wouldn't they have been more desperate to make a deal at the trade deadline? Wouldn't they have traded for Lowry?
All these Knicks FO moves point toward only two possibilities.
1. The Knicks already know that Melo is staying and will be patient until next season when our expiring contracts have more value and better deals can be made.
2. The Knicks do not intend to re-sign Melo and have an alternate plan for the future.
#1 is pretty simple, with the intention being to target expiring contracts that could be valuable in 2014 to rebuild a better future team in 2014 or 2015 at the latest. Unfortunately, word quickly got out with Anthony's "free agency" talks and the media got on the case kicking every tire. This could have had the effect of making players feel they were only trade fodder and Woodson was a lame duck coach. Woodson not being a good enough coach to get beyond the "lame duck" perception, quickly devolved into the clusterphuck we are in now.
#2 Would imply that when Dolan decided on Melo over D'Antoni, he did so on a probationary basis. And since Melo has not been able to deliver, the FO is looking at moving on from Melo and looking to a quick rebuild with expirings next season and cap space in 2015. This would explain Dolan's reluctance to make any "win now" moves during the season. His willingness to keep Woodson as head coach, despite his poor performance. No sense of urgency or desperation regarding Melo's coming free agency. Unwillingness to trade Shump. Keep in mind that the only deal the Knicks were willing to do at the deadline was one in which we dumped the 2015 salary of Felton and Shump (cap hold).
If you guys have any other theories that fit the facts, please feel free.