Champions League is something where consistency shows more than actually pulling a finals run or even winning it once every now and then.
Tottenham reaching the CL final after a fluke (Inter choking in the group, Ajax choking in the semi after a 3-0 aggregate lead and VAR stuff with City) does not make them a great team or something.
Chelsea on the other hand is quite consistent in Europe. But they're an example of why wins shouldn't be taken into account. Chelsea was a far better side in the 2000s and a bigger threat, yet they won 4 European trophies in the 2010s with a squad that has no business being there, similar to Liverpool in the mid 2000s with the likes of Traore, Biscan and Smicer winning the CL out of nowhere. You can call this "maturity" of a football club, if you wish, but truth is, they're not winning because they're a better side that spends more money, but for other reasons.
Inter needs consistency and for consistency you need the right mentality and the right coach. We did not have that under Conte, at least when it comes to Europe. Chelsea may have more depth, but the 14 (or even 16) players that would be used, are no better than ours and I'd take our squad over theirs any time.