I was that expert recently, but in a university lab, with undergrads as my juniors... I spent 90% of my time trying to convince people NOT to rip out everything and start from scratch; not to depend directly on database details, not to shove everything into mongodb and react, not to implement a new full stack for every subsection of the project they were working on.
One guy was supposed to have modify an android app to update repeatedly every 5s for a simple, one-user management view; started it by setting up a firebase instance
Another decided that rdbms was no good, and spent the entire semester trying to convince me to switch to mongodb, because "mysql can't handle the number of requests we're making" (~50/day, maybe ~1k/day long into the future).
A third guy decided the message queue was a bottleneck, and came to me with a proposal to reimplement it; after about 15 minutes, I finally pulled out from him that it would take an expected 6 weeks to implement, and EVERYONE had to stop working in the meantime. Simply looking at the logs, the message queue was clearly not a bottleneck, and there was no reason it couldn't be worked on while the current one stays useful...
My primary job was just keeping the project from burning down, let alone improved. And every one of those students thought I was holding the project back, as I desperately tried to maintain a working system.
That might have just been the inexperience of undergrads, but I have some sympathy for your "experts". Everyone's just gobbling up the marketing, confidently pushing ideas derived from inexperience and no one has any respect for history (at least, in my uni). I was also only one year split from the project, and it had changed from 2 developers to 20, so not the same scale as you're suggesting