Your ideas sound cool, but I'm responding to point out that Red and Pokemon Trainer are absolutely the same character. He's not named in Smash for the same reasons as Hero and the Persona Protagonist Costumes.
Red is the protagonist of Pokemon Red/Blue/Yellow/FireRed/LeafGreen.
...Pokemon Trainer is an avatar using his design and has nothing actually in common beyond that and generic phrases all Pokemon Trainers can use. Even the Trophies just talk about the pure Class. Where does Red legitimately exist in Smash? The lore specifies it's a generic class. He's literally a generic class name. He doesn't have a specific name since the point behind the class is that you can be any name you want, just like the games. Using his appearance does not make him the same actual character. If anything, they're more like cross-dimensional counterparts at best. Same with Leaf and female Pokemon Trainer.
He literally acts like an avatar(and she as of Ultimate), is treated like an avatar in-universe, is actually described at best as an avatar by Sakurai. How is he Red again? There's a difference between being the same character(which they are evidently different characters) and having a similar idea behind them. I mean, when they refuse to talk about Red's exploits in any trophies, and compare PT simply to Ash, not Red, that already says something. In addition to that, we have another set of Pokemon Trainers as a Trophy, from X and Y. He's focusing literally on the Class alone in Smash. There's been very few actual Trainers directly named. Misty is one of the few.
Based upon a character(which is the case) and being the same character are two totally different things. People can believe he's the literal Red, but that doesn't make it accurate. He's literally(and she since Ultimate) an actual Avatar.
Hero also isn't comparable. Not when Sakurai made it clear he wanted Edrick and Luminary, not the "hero design from x game" either. They were intentionally defined as who they were from the start. He describes them as such(cannot be said for Pokemon Trainer) and they also still are based around an Avatar-like situation, without entirely being Avatars. Pokemon Trainer is exactly like Villager, a completely generic character using a basic iconic design as is. That's just how it goes sometimes. The same for the female Villager. Both of the first designs were their most known ones from game boxarts. The rest were other various ones that happened to work.
I get why too. You don't need Red whatsoever to represent Pokemon Training as is. You could use any Trainer design with the same actual point. You could literally use Ash's design instead if you wanted to and get the same effect. Just with more complaints cause "anime"(despite the fact the anime gets used anyway, but I do agree using a game design would get a better response). The actual outfit chosen had no real bearing on how the character worked. And that's ignoring how Red doesn't actually speak in canon. Those weird phrases are generic ones throughout the entire series. Even enemy trainers use them. They don't define Red at all. They do define the class to a degree, but barely.