Braves say no to no trade clause

David O'Brian at The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, writes about the Braves not willing to include a no trade clause if Glavine goes back to Atlanta (pray he doesn't):

As most of you know, the Braves don’t give no-trade clauses. One of the few teams that doesn't. Or at least they haven't, not under John Schuerholz.

Chipper didn't get one, Andruw didn't get one, Smoltz didn't get one, not even when Chipper and Smoltz reworked their contracts in the past two years to help accommodate the Braves.

So there's no reason to believe Glavine can get one from the Braves. And that could be a problem. A big problem. A deal-breaking problem (again, assuming the Braves make him an offer, which I’m fairly certain they will once the Mets formally decline their $14 million option on Glavine by Monday night's midnight deadline).

Even if the 40-year-old Glavine were willing to accept $7 million from the Braves instead of, say, a two-year offer worth $20 million from the Mets, here's why the no-trade clause could ultimately keep him from returning to Atlanta (and I'm assuming _ lots of assumptions, huh? _ that Glavine sincerely is debating whether to take less and return to Atlanta for the sake of his family, including children whose lives he's tired of having to disrupt by flying them from the family home in suburban Atlanta to New York most weekends to see dad in-season).