Unless you needed the PC sync, 9pin, heft, or Cf slot. Do yourself a favor and just get a D7000. It has all the pro features found on the D200 (-1 button) much better image quality and lowlight (its jpegs have more dynamic range than a D200 Raw and it does 14bit), pro features not found on the D200, a more useful buffer at 5fps, 100% viewfinder, no less durable (and has a metal grip unlike the plastic one for the D200), has a much better battery life, remembers old Ai lenses, puts a copyright stamp on pics, has in camera post editing, quicker and more accurate AF (much quicker on AF-D lenses), much more manageable dynamic range in terms of white balance too, Iso's very usable up to 3200 (D200 barely clears ISO 800),cleans itsself(big one), has liveview/video etc
A d400 sounds better but from the looks of it the D7000 should be more than enough. How do I know? Because I shoot the D7000, D90, and D200 (manual too) side by side almost every day often doing around 2000 shots a day per body. While I love it, my D200 is at the bottom of the 3 as it's image quality (while great) is eons behind the D7000. Even the D90 and D300s are much better in many areas. The one switch I missed on the D90 (AF array selector) is on the body of the D7000 in a new place (D4 has it in the same spot so I'm guessing the D400 will echo that)
Other than the heft and plug the D7000 has everything a D200 owner would want to upgrade to.
While personally I am most eager for the D800 (deciding between that and a D700 when released) I do hope a D400 does make it to the market as it would be an out of this world camera...