Yeah the amount a guy is being paid literally doesn't matter in a vacuum. It's not your money so you shouldn't feel a sense of being "ripped off" if you're not getting what you feel is the correct value (and shouldn't it also follow that if the club has underpaid players, it would be good and proper for them to be upgraded immediately, rather than squeezing all the juice you can out of them while they're still a bargain?).
All that matters is results at the end of the day, if you've got a competitive team out of the resources used. Do you think a single Panthers fan gives a **** that they were still paying Reagan Campbell-Gillard $400K a season to play for Parra when they were winning premierships?
If you anticipate having a fair number of players on cheap contracts in coming years, it actually makes more sense to overpay Leo to retain him than it does to hold firm and let him walk. It just does. What will the club do with the money if he doesn't stay? People keep saying "oh we'll sign someone better for the same money". Okay. Who? Where from? The Prop Store?
It's frankly weird to see that one of your players is the most highly sought after free agent of an off season, attracting huge money offers from multiple clubs, and then come to the conclusion "it would be very easy to sign a better player for less money". Gee, better not tell those other clubs who are coming after Leo that! They'll steal that guy from us too!