Tom Silverstein writes about how the Green Bay Packers "may fare better" than others in the NFC North. The Packers were going to start their offseason activities a little later anyway because they were the last team playing for the 2010 season, and they have fewer major needs to address.
He mentioned the Bears are likely to rebuild their offensive line, and the Lions have to work QB Matthew Stafford back in again after another season ending injury. Kevin Seifert says the Vikings have the "poorly timed tri-fecta" as they have to work in a new starting QB, new offensive coordinator, and sell the MN state legislature on a new stadium.
While that all sounds reasonable, it's also a lot of speculation. If the lockout takes away a substantial number of reps from Stafford and new Vikings starting QB, then it could be a problem. But it hasn't yet.
If the mini-camps or training camp were shortened, then the Packers would have an advantage because they are returning with the same offensive and defensive schemes. But I wouldn't bet against any opponent just because the Packers are better prepared. It all seems too speculative, and any advantage would be a slight one.