Lots of good candidates didn't make the final poll list, including arguably the three greatest closers ever (Lee Smith, Bruce Sutter and Dennis Eckersley, all of whom were better known with other teams), Johnny Mize, Mark McGwire (!), Red Schoendienst, Curt Flood, Ken Boyer, Ted Simmons, Jesse Haines and many others.

I voted Stan the Man.  Hornsby was objectively the more impressive hitter, and played second base but...

Maybe someday it will be Pujols. But not yet.

Stan the Man.

By the way, I actually saw Stan Musial play baseball.

I desperately wish I could actually remember it.

I may be missing something....  Musial was a stellar player, one of the all-time greats, and he has it all over Hornsby in HRs and a slight edge in MVPs. But Hornsby has a higher career BA, OBP, SLG, OPS+, more batting titles, more OPS titles, more slugging titles, more OPS+ titles, and 2 Triple Crowns to boot. How does Hornsy not have the decisive edge over Musial?

Hornsby was also viewed as his era's Barry Bonds - thats probably the best comparison - except with issues with his teammates as well. Great, great player but not liked at all from what I've read. I still picked him much like I'd be signing A-Rod if I ran a MLB team, see if Bonds was interested in DH'ing, etc. Talent almost always wins out, with personality being something used in tie breakers only.

As a defensive player, Hornsby seems to have been somewhere between mediocre and adequate. And of course, the only way to get along with him was to do whatever he said, and often even that wasn't good enough. Which was why after awhile everyone who had him just couldn't wait to get rid of him.

An amazing hitter, though. And I love his wisecrack about why he didn't like golf:

"When I hit a ball, I want someone else to chase it."

I have purposefully not defined "greatest" in any of these polls -- nor will I in the final feature that comes from them. It's the reason Ty Cobb didn't get 100% of the DET vote, for instance, and Ruth not all the NYY votes. Does "greatest" mean "most productive"? If so, for you, that's perfectly acceptable. If it means "face of the franchise," I think that is, too -- Musial was a career Cardinal and very much the face of the franchise; in fact, he really still is, in many ways. So while Hornsby was almost certainly "better," Musial was, in my estimation, "greater."

Definitions of "greater" may not apply in your state or province. Proceed at your own risk. Exceptions may apply. Refunds not guaranteed.

Clearly, Stan is the Man.

The objective side, Jordan, is actually a bit murky.  Much of Hornsby's apparent superiority to Musial arises from his batting averages.  He hit .400 during the period 1921-25, which sounds as though it was an out of this world accomplishment, but there is reason to believe that it might be a bit overstated.  Park adjusted league batting averages were .300 during that period, and Hornsby had a BABIP of .400 during this period. Musial hit .350 during his peak when park-adjusted league batting averages were .275 despite striking out much less than Hornsby.

We know that the game underwent a rapid change during the time of Hornsby's peak.  It does seem that this may have led to a decentralization of batting statistics.  In the result, hitting .400 in Hornsby's time may not have been more impressive than hitting .350 in Musial's. 

Five people voted for Ozzie Smith?  I couldn't believe he was a first ballot HoFer...

I actually saw Musial play, too.  Several times, at Wrigley Field in the late '40s.  He was a very smart player; could do many things well (even started out as a pitcher, but got hurt).  What I remember most are the doubles.  It seemed that every time he came to the plate, and took up that absolutely distinctive crouch of his, he'd then smoothly uncoil and a double would be headed to the gap.  He was a great player.

Checking some stats...

Hornsby: Lifetime OPS+=175, years over 200=3 in StL, 1 in Boston (Braves), 2 MVP awards
Musial: Lifetime OPS+= 159, years over 200=1 (dead on 200), 3 MVP awards

Funny thing is Hornsby couldn't win an MVP before age 28 (no award to give) but Musial won all 3 by that age. 

Hornsby led in OPS 11 times, OPS+ 12 times
Musial led in OPS 7 times, OPS+ 6 times

Hornsby played 2B/3B/SS  with just 55 games elsewhere in his career.
Musial played LF and 1B plus 1 game on the mound, not sure how many in CF/RF.

Hornsby played in the 20's mainly, vs white only competition
Musial played in the 40/50's mainly, but did get one MVP in the middle of WWII (he lost just one season to the war)

Hornsby was on two WS teams, one won, one lost, he hit 245/288/327 overall in them
Musial was on four WS teams, 3 wins, 1 lost, 256/347/395 but 3 were during the war years and the 4th in 46, all pre-integration just like Hornsby's 2.

Musial 22 years as a Cardinal, Hornsby 12 1/2 plus 4 1/2 as a St Louis Brown (mainly as a manager)

Hornsby managed for over 1500 games with one WS win (as a Card) and one other playoff appearance (elsewhere)
Musial never managed

Funny that Hornsby was not liked but was still able to be an effective manager.

I still take Hornsby, and as a stats person would have trouble taking Musial.  Still, I can see why he was loved as he was very consistent and spent a very, very long time there.