The picture here is not good, and laying it out honestly is more useful than softening it.
Two probation violations on top of nearly a year of absconding and a failure to appear is a stack of problems that gives a judge very little reason to extend leniency again. Each of those issues on its own would be serious. Together, they tell a story of someone who was given multiple opportunities to comply and chose not to engage with the process at all. Judges read that pattern clearly and respond to it accordingly.
The most likely outcome is that the judge revokes probation entirely and imposes the remainder of the original suspended sentence. That is the ceiling, and in this situation, it is a realistic one rather than a worst-case hypothetical. The original sentence was calculated, suspended, and replaced with probation as an act of trust. With two violations, a year of not reporting, a failure to appear, and unpaid fines, that trust has been exhausted.
The one piece of relatively good news is that it cannot be worse than the original sentence. The judge cannot add time beyond what was originally imposed for the underlying charge. Whatever was suspended when probation was granted is the maximum exposure on the violation itself. New charges, if any were picked up during the period he was not reporting, would be a separate matter entirely.
The unpaid fines will also need to be addressed. Courts take failure to pay seriously, and a payment plan or some resolution on the fines is something an attorney can negotiate as part of the overall resolution.
He needs legal representation before he appears in front of that judge. Walking in without an attorney at this point is not advisable.