I guess you'd have to define apostasy, as in my book several of the apologists are already in serious apostasy by virtue of rejecting core teachings of the prophets.
Not to divert this fun thread into something serious, but I have to disagree with you here. I can't take credit for this idea, either, but I can't remember who first pointed it out.
I have grown to view apologists as the real True Believers who really ARE following the core of Joseph Smith' teachings. (Ben also helped me to figure this out on the postmodern thread on Z, although most believers would distance themselves from this idea.)
Joseph Smith was willing to alter anything - he'd alter past revelations without comment or notice. He altered his own thoughts and teachings. It really is true - the content of the "revelation" doesn't matter at all. What matters is "revelation" and the church surviving through it.
Does God the Father have a body or not? Are there two members of the godhead or three? Did God ordain Joseph Smith to a gift OTHER than translating the Book of Mormon? All were changed by Joseph Smith without comment (although those who became apostates noticed).
I do believe apologists are far closer to this pattern than traditional believers are, including the prophets.
So while apologists are not the best generic representation of the modern LDS church or the thoughts and beliefs of its members, they are a better representation of Joseph Smith, and what he was really all about. in my opinion.