1. Different Categories

Aprioricity is an epistemological notion. This is why we don't say that a statement is a priori, but that it is knowable a priori. There's always an implicit reference to knowledge. Analyticity is a logico-semantical notion. Here we do say that a statement is analytic. There is no implicit reference to knowledge, but, arguably, there is always an implicit reference to a language system.

2. Different Criteria of Truth

A statement S is knowable a priori just in case it's possible to come to know S by just thinking about it, without resorting to any experience. For example, "it's raining outside or it's not" is something you can come to know without looking out the window.

There are lots of different ways of giving the criterion of truth for analyticity, so I'm just going to mention here my favorite one (due to Carnap). A statement S is analytic with respect to P just in case S is a logical consequence of P. P is just an arbitrary conjunction of sentences, called meaning postulates, such as "all bachelors are unmarried", "if something is uniformly black, then it's not of any color other than black", and so on. Let's test the criterion. The sentence "if John is a bachelor then John is unmarried" is analytic with respect to those meaning postulates P, because P includes the sentence "all bachelors are unmarried" and "if John is a bachelor then John is unmarried" is simply its substitution-instance.

3. Notes. For both aprioricity and analyticity, there are many different proposed criteria of truth in the literature. One of the more popular alternative definitions of analyticity is that a sentence S is analytic just in case it's true solely by virtue of the meanings of the terms occurring in it. If you're interested in analyticity, I highly recommend checking out Gillian Russell's highly readable 2008 monograph: Truth in Virtue of Meaning: A Defence of the Analytic/Synthetic Distinction.