Both players are starting point guards:

Player A - 42.3 fg%, 88.1 ft% (4.5/5.1 per game), 40.8 3pt% (2.9/7.1 per game), 3.6 rpg, 5.8 apg, 0.7 spg, 2.3 topg, 20.9 ppg in 36.2 mpg

Player B - 42.6 fg%, 85.3 ft% (4.1/4.8 per game), 35.1 3pt%(1.7/4.9 per game) 3.1 rpg, 6.3 apg, 1.3 spg, 2.7 topg, 21.3 ppg in 35.1 mpg

Very similar players in almost all aspects.  The only really significant difference is a 5.7% difference in 3pt percentage.  Yet one of these players is getting a lot of positive hype this year and one of them is getting a lot of criticism.

Player A is Damian Lillard, Player B is Kyrie Irving.  A lot of the positivity in Lillard comes from his improvement and his team winning.  A lot of the negativity around Kyrie comes from his lack of improvement and his team losing.  The winning/losing thing has a lot to do with the supporting casts around the players. 

As for the improvement/lack of it... I'm starting to think this is a bit of an unfair criticism on Kyrie.  He entered the league and put up extremely high numbers, especially in terms of efficiency... especially for a rookie... especially for a rookie point guard.  To expect those numbers to stay at those levels or improve would be to ask a lot.  His %'s are still decent at the moment compared to the pool of starting point guards in the NBA.

The last issue with Kyrie is maturity.  Even though he has 1 more year of NBA experience under him, Kyrie is still 2 years younger than Lillard.  The regression certainly has to be concerning to the Cavs, but at age 21 I think there is plenty of time for him to figure things out.