Ganon's wizard kick clanks with Kirby's dash attack and hits him out of most aerials.
I can make you feel like Kirby's dash attack is the hardest move in the game to punish.(exaggeration/inb4 shine is brought up)
I don't know man, I've played against N64 Pikachu's fair.
It is true that it comes down to the players. However, this was a HUGE tournament, and many of PM's top players were there. The best players are the greatest representatives of the current state of the metagame. Ignoring this result is stupid and arrogant. C'mon, Kasen.
I wouldn't put Pit all that much higher yet either because it is too early and M2K probably would have done better if he opted for a different character, such as Marth, throughout grand finals. What do I know, though.
I do know that tourney results matter though because they are the bridge between smash in theory and smash in practice. Results serve as evidence as to how well a character can perform in the current metagame. Results CAN'T be ignored entirely.
The problem is when "How can Ike be that low, he got top 8s!" is used as the justification for higher placement. It could have been any number of viable characters in the top 8 (I lied, it can only be 8 of them). It's like people think not being top or high means not being viable.
Results to justify placement doesn't require critical thinking or analysis of the character. It's easy and it's convenient. Now, a characters placement may draw parallels to their results in tournaments, and the tournament setting offers an acceptable way to view how the character works at a high level given the matchup against other players, but using the results alone do not show what went into the matches.
By results, a 3-0 GF sweep means the same thing as 10 close GF matches in terms of "who won." When I'm watching tournament play, I'm not looking for who wins; I'm looking for what the characters are demonstrating, what each player is doing, how their opponent is adapting, and how they are readapting and reapplying their characters' techs.
Tournaments are a good way to see, for example, that Pikachu may have hidden tech- if someone comes out of the woodwork showing the use of Pikachu in a new, inventive, and strong way, of course Pikachu's placement should be reflected in that. Metagaming is based on an understanding and analyzing the tech and application thereof. Tournament results are based on the metagame, not the other way around. Were that it was, the metagame would stagnate extremely quickly as nothing new is discovered.