You're kidding right? Maps, android, camera, calendar, hangout, pay/wallet, docs, sheets, slides, voice to text stuff, YouTube, chrome/debugger, kubernetes, grpc, Gmail, music, ads... Pretty ubiquitous suite of products both consumer facing and business facing... I don't think you can question that Google has been successful at innovation. You can question if they could be doing it better but impossible to say they aren't having some success doing what they're doing...
Acquisition, acquisition, basic OS feature (and therefore part of the Android acquisition), Google EEE of thing you could already do (and developed by an individual Google developer without the approval of Google management), Google CADT, Google EEE of something you could already do, acquisition, acquisition, actual Google creation, don't know, Google EEE of something that already existed (Firebug was first), not good, too trivial to count, actual Google creation that I already mentioned, don't know what you mean, not good.
Flights were acquisition and to this day are a bit of unlikely island internally (AFAIK QPX engine is still in use, and it's written in language otherwise verboten at Google)
So only 2/5 of the ones you mentioned were started in-house, and all were pre-2010 (pre-Sundar) creations.
edit: Sundar joined Google in 2004 and apparently led Maps, Chrome, and eventually Android before becoming CEO. So "pre-Sundar" is technically incorrect.
This characterization is pretty misleading. For example, the Google Maps that was acquired was a C++ desktop application. What most people think of as Google Maps (the AJAX web app) was built and launched by Google.
There's search, obviously. Gmail, if that wasn't an acquisition.... What else?