Because this is fair...

Who would you rather have on your team, someone who is stuck in bronze after thousands of games or someone who is in bronze after a handful of games? Hundreds to thousands of games in bronze = right where they belong. A handful of games = potential to gtfo.

{quoted}

Two of our people had a combined 5 wins of ranked experience, I was the most experienced with 71 wins (And 71 losses :( ). The enemy team had 116 wins as their least experienced ranked player, and had a total of 909 ranked wins versus our 212 ranked wins. And it isn't like they had a disadvantage in normals either, since they had a total of 3297 wins in normals to our 1972 wins. They were literally well over twice as experienced as we were.

Does experience matter when that experience isn't translated into more skill or better decision-making?

It has zero to do with experience and everything to do with mmr. And it is very plausible, especially at B4 elo to have people with the same rank and a difference of 150 ranked games or more